HE 


iiiiiiiiiiiiii 


I!  Il 


! 


i  IHI 


I 


i 


I! 


liiiiiii 

li 

I    jilltM!!!! 


ill 


llilliilil 


llfl 


i!!li  HI 


I     I! 


i 
Hill 


I 


III! 


Hi 
I 


III! 


li!';!l!! 


i!  il 


;i  !i 


! 


nil 


lil!i 


I 


m 

i  Hi 


11 

iiiii: 


ni:ii! 


READING  ROOM 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 


Class 


THE    NEWEST    FICTION 
BEFORE    ADAM 

A  ROMANCE  OF  THE  PREHISTORIC  WORLD 

By  Jack  London 

Illustrated  in  Colors  by  C.  L.  Bull 

12mo,  cloth,  $1,50 

Jack  London  has  always  shown  himself  powerfully 
influenced  and  attracted  by  the  most  elemental  conditions 
of  life.  More  successful  than  any  other  writer,  he  has 
exposed  the  psychology  of  the  primitive,  elemental  creature, 
and  always  entertainingly.  It  is  appropriate,  therefore,  that 
he  should  now  undertake  to  reconstruct  in  the  light  of 
modern  science  the  life  of  the  earliest  man.  Other  stories 
of  prehistoric  times  there  have  been,  but  none  at  once  so 
imaginative  and  so  thoroughly  in  accord  with  science  as  this 
tale  of  London's ;  and  he  has  made  a  story  full  of  incident, 
unflagging  in  its  interest  and  dramatic  in  climax. 

LOVE     OF     LIFE 

AND  OTHER  STORIES 

By  Jack  London 

12mOi  cloth,  $1.50 ;  paper,  25  cents 

There  are  those  who  consider  that  Mr.  London  is  at  his 
best  in  writing  a  short  story.  Certainly  his  ability  to  clothe 
an  incident  in  picturesque  garb  and  endow  it  with  entrancing 
interest  for  the  reader  is  comparable  only  to  the  skill  with 
which  a  gem-cutter  evolves  the  flashing  jewel  out  of  the  dull 
pebble.  The  eight  tales  in  the  present  volume  are  among 
the  most  striking  of  this  author's  briefer  productions :  and 
their  titles  show  that  they  deal  mainly  with  that  far  mys- 
terious North,  where  every  act  seems  an  adventure. 

In  addition  to  the  powerful,  tragical,  title-story,  "  Love 
of  Life,"  the  book  contains:  *' A  Day's  Lodging,'  *  The 
White  Man's  Way,"  "The  Story '  of  Keesh,"  "  The 
Unexpected,"  "  Brown's  Wolf,"  and  *'The  Sun-Dog Trail." 


THE    NEWEST    FICTION 
A    SIMPLE     SPELLING     BEE 

By  Owen  Wister 
Author  of       The   Virginian  " 
12mOf  cloth,  50  cents. 
By  common  consent  Owen  Wister' s  latest  book  is  the 
most  recklessly  amusing  he  has  ever  written.     Its  spirit  is 
the  spirit  of  pure  farce,  and  the  vein  of  satire  that  runs 
through  it  only  adds  to  the  hilarity  of  the  tale.      The  point 
of  the  satire  is  indeed  sufficiently  in  evidence  in  the  inge- 
nious title,  which  reads  in  full :     * '  How  Doth  the  Simple 
Spelling  Bee  Impruv  Each  Shining  Ower."     Evidently  Mr. 
Wister  refuses  to  take  the  efforts  of  the  extreme  spelling 
reformers    seriously.  Remember   the    poor    foreigners," 

says  one  of  the  characters  in  his  story;  **  remember  the 
little  children.  It  is  for  them  that  the  English  language 
exists."  Such  is  the  tone  of  the  book.  Quite  apart  from 
his  hits  at  spelling  reform,  however,  the  high  spirits  and  zest 
for  fun  of  this  little  tale  make  it  a  comic  masterpiece. 

GHETTO    COMEDIES 

By  Israel  Zangwill 
Author  of  *  *  Ghetto  Tragedies, "   * '  Children  of  the  Ghetto, ' ' 
*  Merely  Mary  Ann,"  etc. 
12mo,  cloth,  $1.50 
Mr.  ZangwilPs  short  stories  are  among  the  most  tren- 
chant, appealing    and   vivid    that  have  been    published  in 
recent  years.      Each  one  reproduces  a  bit  of  glowing,  active 
life.      His  art  in  the  short  story  is  analogous  to  that  of  the 
great  painters  who,  in  representing  a  bit  of  landscape  on 
canvas  a  few  inches  square,  show  the  whole  universe  pulsing 
through    it.      These   delightful   tales    depict    some   of   the 
humors — always   with   a   touch  of  pathos — of  the  Chosen 
People  who  find  themselves,  often,  strangely  placed  in  the 
busy  world  which  both  attracts  and  repels  them. 


THE     NEWEST     FICTION 
THE     LONG     ROAD 

By  John  Oxenham 
l^mo,  cloth,  $1.50 
This  is  a  novel  sure  to  hold  the  attention  not  only  of  a 
world  just  now  intensely  alive  to  the  horrors  of  Russia,  but 
of  that  larger  world  which  recommends  a  novel  just  because 
it  likes  it.  An  important  figure  is  the  Russian  Governor, 
whose  ingenious  cruelty  devises  the  strange  situation  on 
which  the  story  is  based ;  but  the  two  characters  most  in  the 
foreground  are  the  exile  Stepan  and  his  young  wife  Katia, 
who  manage,  in  spite  of  much  suffering,  to  have  many 
moments  of  happiness.  The  delicacy  and  tenderness  of 
the  tale  prevail  over  the  grim  tragedy ;  and  in  both  power 
and  charm  of  style  this  book  surpasses  any  other  of  the 
author's  many  novels. 

A   VICTOR    OF    SALAMIS 

By  William  Stearns   Davis 

Author  of  *   A  Friend  of  Caesar,"    **  Falaise  of  the  Blessed 

Voice,"  etc. 

12mo,  cloth,  $1.50 

In  this  new  story  Mr.  Davis  has  a  continuous  narrative 
of  glorious  fighting  and  splendid  episodes  of  action  in  classic 
Greece.  The  principal  character  is  a  young  athlete  who 
wins  the  wreath  of  victory  at  the  Isthmian  games.  Later, 
the  scene  shifts  to  Persia,  where  the  book  glows  with  all  the 
color  and  warmth  of  the  Orient  at  the  period  of  Xerxes' 
greatest  power.  This  power  is  turned  toward  the  subjuga- 
tion of  Greece,  and  gives  the  hero  an  opportunity  to  redeem 
his  name  by  manly  feats  of  courage  at  the  battle  of  Salamis 
and  elsewhere. 

It  is  plain  that  a  story  which  includes  scenes  and  events 
so  pregnant  and  thrilling  as  these,  when  handled  by  a  man 
who  long  ago  proved  himself  to  be  a  born  story-teller,  must 
be  one  to  hold  the  attention  of  appreciative  novel  readers. 


THE     NEWEST    FICTION 
HER     MAJESTY'S     REBELS 

By    Sidney    R.    Lysaght 

Author  of  **  The  Marplot,"    "One  of  the  Grenvilles,"  etc. 

12mo,  cloth,  $1.50 

Mr.  Lysaght's  story  has  its  root  in  an  Irish  statute 
made  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,  by  which  a  younger  son 
on  becoming  a  Protestant  could  disinherit  the  elder  who 
remained  a  Catholic.  One  Henry  Desmond  took  advantage 
of  this  law,  turned  Protestant  and  inherited  the  estates. 
Michael  Desmond,  the  hero  of  the  tale,  was  the  descendant 
of  the  disinherited  elder  brother,  and  Sir  Henry  Desmond 
was  the  descendant  of  the  younger,  who  had  robbed  his 
brother  of  his  birthright. 

When  it  is  added  that  this  preternatural  antagonism  is 
carried  into  the  rivalry  of  two  most  complicated  and  inter- 
woven romances,  and  the  troublous  political  scenes  of  the 
early  80s,  it  will  be  seen  that  material  is  at  hand  for  a  suffi- 
ciently stirring  tale.  Altogether  Her  Majesty"* s  Rebels  is  a 
remarkable  book,  and  no  one  on  the  look-out  for  the  best  in 
contemporary  fiction  can  afford  to  miss  it." 

THE   KINSMAN 

By  Mrs.  Alfred  Sidgwick 
12mo,  cloth,  $1.50 
Mrs.  Sidgwick  is  known  to  a  very  large  circle  of  readers 
in  England  as  a  delightful  and  accomplished  story-teller. 
Her  new  book  is  a  work  of  admirable  originality  and  unforced 
humor,  based  on  a  situation  of  unlimited  possibilities.  By  a 
series  of  plausible  accidents  a  worthless  young  cockney  finds 
himself  usurping  the  place  of  a  handsome  and  wealthy  cousin 
from  Australia,  whom  he  happens  to  resemble  very  closely. 
So  far  as  the  situation  is  concerned,  the  story  might  be  called 
a  farcical  version  of  The  Masquerader. "  But  the  result- 
ing train  of  incidents  leading  to  the  amusing  denouement  is 
Mrs.  Sidgwick's  own,  and  sufficiently  establishes  her  claim 
not  only  to  originality  but  to  sparkling  humor. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/britishstateteleOOmeyerich 


THE  BRITISH  STATE 
TELEGRAPHS 


^n^g^. 


THE  BRITISH  STATE 
TELEGRAPHS 


A    STUDY  OF  THE   PROBLEM   OF  A   LARGE   BODY  OF 
CIVIL   SERVANTS    IN   A   DEMOCRACY 


BY 
HUGO  RICHARD-MEYER 

SOMETIME    ASSISTANT   PROFESSOR    OF   POLITICAL    ECONOMY   IN   THE 

UNIVERSITY   OF  CHICAGO,    AUTHOR    OF    "GOVERNMENT 

REGULATION  OF  RAILWAY  RATES;"    "MUNICIPAL 

OWNERSHIP   IN    GREAT   BRITAIN*' 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

LONEiON:  MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  Ltd, 
1907 

^11  rights  reserved 


0^1^ 


v\^v-\^ 


*%^ 


Copyright,  1907 
By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 


Set  up  and  e'ectrotyped.    Published  October  1907 


THK  MASON-HBNRT  PRBSS 
8TRACUSE,  NBW  YORK 


TO  MY  BROTHER 


212462 


PREFACE 

In  order  to  keep  within  reasonable  limits  the  size  of 
this  volume,  the  author  has  been  obliged  to  reserve  for 
a  separate  volume  the  story  of  the  Telephone  in  Great 
Britain.  The  series  of  books  promised  in  the  Preface 
to  the  author's  Municipal  Ownership  in  Great  Britain 
will,  therefore,  number  not  four,  but  five. 


VII 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I 

Introduction  ........       3 

Scope  of  the  inquiry. 

CHAPTER  n 

The  Argument  for  the  Nationalization  of  the  Tele- 
graphs ........      13 

The  indictment  of  the  telegraph  companies.  The 
argument  from  foreign  experience.  The  promise  of 
reduced  tariffs  and  increased  facilities.  The  alleged 
financial  success  of  foreign  State  telegraphs:  Belgium, 
Switzerland  and  France.  The  argument  from  English 
company  experience. 

CHAPTER  in 

The  alleged  Break-down  of  Laissez-faire     .  .  .36 

Early  history  of  telegraphy  in  Great  Britain.  The 
adequacy  of  private  enterprise.  Mr.  Scudamore's  loose 
use  of  statistics.  Mr.  Scudamore's  test  of  adequacy  of 
facilities.  Telegraphic  charges  and  growth  of  traffic  in 
Great  Britain.  The  alleged  wastefulness  of  competi- 
tion.    The  telegraph  companies'  proposal. 

CHAPTER  IV 

The  Purchase  of  the  Telegraphs  .         .         -       .  .      57 

Upon  inadequate  consideration  the  Disraeli  Ministry 
estimates  at  $15,000,000  to  $20,000,000  the  cost  of 
nationalization.     Political     expediency    responsible     for 


CONTENTS 

Government's  inadequate  investigation.  The  Govern- 
ment raises  its  estimate  to  $30,000,000;  adding  that  it 
could  afford  to  pay  $40,000,000  to  $50,000,000.  Mr.  Gos- 
chen,  M.  P.,  and  Mr.  Leeman,  M.  P.,  warn  the  House 
of  Commons  against  the  Government's  estimates,  which 
had  been  prepared  by  Mr.  Scudamore.  The  Gladstone 
Ministry,  relying  on  Mr.  Scudamore,  estimates  at  $3,- 
500,000  the  "reversionary  rights"  of  the  railway  com- 
panies, for  which  rights  the  State  ultimately  paid 
$10,000,000  to  $11,000,000. 


CHAPTER  V 

None    of    Mr.    Scudamore's    Financial    Forecasts    were 
Realized  ........ 

The  completion  of  the  telegraph  system  costs  $8,500,- 
000;  Mr.  Scudamore's  successive  estimates  had  been  re- 
spectively $1,000,000  and  $1,500,000.  Mr.  Scudamore's 
brilliant  forecast  of  the  increase  of  traffic  under  public 
ownership.  Mr.  Scudamore's  appalling  blunder  in  pre- 
dicting that  the  State  telegraphs  would  be  self-support- 
ing. Operating  expenses  on  the  average  exceed  92.5% 
of  the  gross  earnings,  in  contrast  to  Mr.  Scudamore's 
estimate  of  51%  to  56%.  The  annual  telegraph  deficits 
aggregate  26.5%  of  the  capital  invested  in  the  plant. 
The  financial  failure  of  the  State  telegraphs  is  not  due 
to  the  large  price  paid  to  the  telegraph  companies  and 
railway  companies.  The  disillusionment  of  an  eminent 
advocate  of  nationalization,  Mr.  W.  Stanley  Jevons. 


CHAPTER  VI 

The  Party  Le.\ders  ignore  their  Fear  of  an  Organized 

Civil   Service    ........      94 

Mr.  Disraeli,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  opposes 
the  enfranchisement  of  the  civil  servants.  Mr.  Glad- 
stone, Leader  of  the  Opposition,  assents  to  enfranchise- 
ment, but  expresses  grave  apprehensions  of  evil  results. 

X 


CONTENTS 
CHAPTER  VII 

The  House  of  Commons  is  Responsible  for  the  Finan- 
cial Failure  of  the  State  Telegraphs      .  .  -99 

Sir  S.  Northcote,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  in 
Mr.  Disraeli's  Ministry  of  1874  to  1880,  is  disillusioned. 
The  State  telegraphs  become  self-supporting  in  1879-80. 
The  House  of  Commons,  under  the  leadership  of  Dr. 
Cameron,  M.  P.,  for  Glasgow,  overrides  the  Ministry 
and  cuts  the  tariff  almost  in  two.  In  1890-91  the  State 
telegraphs  would  again  have  become  self-supporting,  had 
not  the  House  of  Commons,  under  pressure  from  the 
civil  service  unions,  increased  wages  and  salaries.  The 
necessity  of  making  money  is  the  only  effective  incentive 
to  sound  management. 

CHAPTER  VIII 

The  State  Telegraphs  Subsidize  the  Newspaper  Press  113 
Why  the  newspaper  press  demanded  nationalization. 
Mr.  Scudamore  gives  the  newspaper  press  a  tariff 
which  he  deems  unprofitable.  Estimates  of  the  loss  in- 
volved in  transmitting  press  messages,  made  by  respon- 
sible persons  in  the  period  from  1876  to  1900.  The 
State  telegraphs  subsidize  betting  on  horse  races. 

CHAPTER  IX 

The  Post  Office  Employees  press  the  House  of  Com- 
mons for  Increases  of  Wages  and  Salaries      .         .    127 

British  Government's  policy  as  to  wages  and  salaries 
for  routine  work,  as  distinguished  from  work  requir- 
ing a  high  order  of  intelligence.  The  Fawcett  revision 
of  wages,  1881.  Lord  Frederick  Cavendish,  Financial 
Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  on  pressure  exerted  on 
Members  of  Parliament  by  the  telegraph  employees. 
Sir  S.  A.  Blackwood,  Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Post 
Office,  on  the  Fawcett  revision  of  1881.  Evidence  as 
to  civil  servants'  pressure  on  Members  of  Parliament 
presented  to  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 


CONTENTS 

ments,  1888.  The  Raikes  revision  of  1890-91 ;  based 
largely  on  the  Report  of  the  Committee  on  the  Indoor 
Staff,  which  Committee  had  recommended  increases  in 
order  "to  end  agitation."  The  Earl  Compton,  M.  P., 
champions  the  cause  of  the  postal  employees  in  1890; 
and  moves  for  a  Select  Committee  in  1891.  Sir  James 
Fergusson,  Postmaster  General  in  the  Salisbury 
Ministry,  issues  an  order  against  Post  Office  servants 
"endeavoring  to  extract  promises  from  any  candidate 
for  election  to  the  House  of  Commons  with  reference 
to  their  pay  or  duties."  The  Gladstone  Ministry  re- 
scinds Sir  James  Fergusson's  order.  Mr,  Macdonald's 
Motion,  in  1893,  for  a  House  of  Commons  Select  Com- 
mittee. Mr.  Kearley's  Motion,  in  1895.  The  Govern- 
ment compromises,  and  appoints  the  so-called  Tweed- 
mouth  Inter-Departmental  Committee. 

CHAPTER  X 

The  Tweedmouth  Committee  Report  .         .         .165 

The  Government  accepts  all  recommendations  made 
by  the  Committee.  Sir  Albert  K.  Rollit,  one  of  the 
principal  champions  in  the  House  of  Commons  of  the 
postal  employees,  immediately  follows  with  a  Motion 
"intended  to  reflect  upon  the  Report  of  the  Tweed- 
mouth  Committee."  Mr.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary 
to  the  Treasury,  intimates  that  it  may  become  necessary 
to  disfranchise  the  civil  servants.  The  Treasury  accepts 
the  recommendations  of  the  so-called  Norfolk-Hanbury 
Committee.  The  average  of  expenses  on  account  of 
wages  and  salaries  rises  from  11.54  cents  per  telegram 
in  1895-96,  to  13.02  cents  in  1902-03,  concomitantly 
with  an  increase  in  the  number  of  telegrams  from  79,- 
423,000  to  92,471,000. 

CHAPTER  XT 

The    Post    Office   Employees    continue   to    press   the 
House   of   Commons    for   Increases   of   Wages    and 
Salaries  ........    182 

The  Post  Office   employees   demand   "a  new  judgment 

xii 


CONTENTS 

on  the  old  facts."    Mr.  S".  Woods'  Motion,  in  February, 

1898.  Mr.  Steadman's  Motions  in  February  and  June, 

1899.  Mr.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treas- 
ury, points  out  that  the  postal  employees  are  demanding 
a  House  of  Commons  Select  Committee  because  under 
such  a  Committee  "the  agitation  and  pressure,  now  dis- 
tributed over  the  whole  House,  would  be  focussed  and 
concentrated  upon  the  Select  Committee."  Mr.  Stead- 
man's  Motion,  in  April,  1900.  Mr.  Bayley's  Motion,  in 
June,  1901.  Mr.  Balfour,  Prime  Minister,  confesses 
that  the  debate  has  filled  him  "with  considerable  anxiety 
as  to  the  future  of  the  public  service  if  pressure  of  the 
kind  which  has  been  put  upon  the  Government  to-night 
is  persisted  in  by  the  House."  Captain  Norton's 
Motion,  in  April,  1902.  The  Government  compromises 
by  appointing  the  Bradford  Committee  of  business  men. 
Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Postmaster  General,  states 
that  Members  from,  both  sides  of  the  House  "seek  from 
him,  in  his  position  as  Postmaster  General,  protection 
for  them  in  the  discharge  of  their  public  duties  against 
the  pressure  sought  to  be  put  upon  them  by  employees 
of  the  Post  Office."  He  adds :  "Even  if  the  machinery 
by  which  our  Select  Committees  are  appointed  were 
such  as  would  enable  us  to  secure  a  Select  Committee 
composed  of  thoroughly  impartial  men  who  had  com- 
mitted themselves  by  no  expression  of  opinion,  I  still 
think  that  it  would  not  be  fair  to  pick  out  fifteen 
Members  of  this  House  and  make  them  marked  men  ' 
for  the  purpose  of  such  pressure  as  is  now  distributed 
more  or  less  over  the  whole  Assembly." 

CHAPTER  XH 
The  Bradford  Committee  Report  ....  214 
The  Bradford  Committee  ignores  its  reference.  It 
recommends  measures  that  would  cost  $6,500,000  a 
year,  in  the  hope  of  satisfying  the  postal  employees, 
who  had  asked  for  $12,500,000  a  year.  Lord  Stanley, 
Postmaster  General,  rejects  the  Bradford  Committee's 
Report;  but  grants  increases  in  wages  aggregating 
$1,861,500  a  year. 

xiii 


CONTENTS 
CHAPTER  XIII 

The   House   of   Commons    Select   Committee  on    Post 

Office  Servants,  1906      .  .....    226 

The  Post  Office  Civil  Servants'  Unions  demand  the 
adoption  of  the  Bradford  Committee  Report.  Lord 
Stanley,  Postmaster  General,  applies  the  words  "black- 
mail" and  "blood-sucking"  to  the  postal  employees' 
methods.  Captain  Norton  moves  for  a  House  of  Com- 
mons Select  Committee.  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain, 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  in  vain  asks  the  Opposi- 
tion Party's  support  for  a  Select  Committee  to  which 
shall  be  referred  the  question  of  the  feasibility  of  es- 
tablishing a  permanent,  non-political  Commission  which 
shall  establish  general  principles  for  settling  disputes 
between  the  civil  servants  and  the  Government  of  the 
day.  Captain  Norton's  Motion  is  lost,  nine  Ministerial 
supporters  voting  for  it,  and  only  two  Opposition 
members  voting  against  it.  Mr.  J.  Henniker  Heaton's 
appeal  to  the  British  public  for  *'An  End  to  Political 
Patronage."  The  Post  Office  employees,  in  the  cam- 
paign preceding  the  General  Election  of  January,  1906, 
induce  nearly  450  of  the  670  parliamentary  candidates 
who  succeeded  in  being  elected,  to  pledge  themselves  to 
vote  for  a  House  of  Commons  Select  Committee  on 
Post  Office  Wages.  Immediately  upon  the  opening  of 
Parliament,  the  Sir  H.  Campbell-Bannerman  Liberal 
Ministry  gives  the  Post  Office  employees  a  House  of 
Commons  Select  Committee. 

CHAPTER  XIV 

The  House  of  Commons,  under  Pressure  from  the  Civil 
Service  Unions,  curtails  the  Executive's  Power  to 
dismiss  Incompetent  and  Redundant  Employees  245 

The  old  practice  of  intervention  by  Members  of 
Parliament  on  behalf  of  individual  civil  servants  with 
political  influence  has  given  way  to  the  new  practice 
of  intervention  on  behalf  of  the  individual  civil  servant 
because  he  is  a  member  of  a  civil  service  union.  The 
xiv 


CONTENTS 

new  practice  is  the  more  insidious  and  dangerous  one, 
for  it  means  class  bribery.  The  doctrine  that  entrance 
upon  the  State's  service  means  "something  very  nearly 
approaching  to  a  freehold  provision  for  life."  Official 
testimony  of  various  prominent  civil  servants,  especially 
of  Mr.  (now  Lord)  Welby,  Permanent  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury  from  1885  to  1894;  and  Mr.  T.  H.  Farrer, 
Permanent  Secretary  to  Board  of  Trade  from  1867  to 
1886.  The  costly  practice  of  giving  pensions  no  solution 
of  the  problem  of  getting  rid  of  unsatisfactory  public 
servants. 

CHAPTER  XV 

The  House  of  Commons,  under  Pressure  from  the  Civil 
Service  Unions,  curtails  the  Executive's  Power  to 
promote  Employees  according  to  Merit    .         .  .    tISj 

The  civil  service  unions  oppose  promotion  by  merit, 
and  demand  promotion  by  seniority.  Testimony  pre- 
sented before:  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services 
Expenditure,  1873;  Select  Committee  on  Post  Office, 
1876;  Royal  Commission  to  inquire  into  the  Civil 
Establishments,  1888;  from  statement  made  in  House 
of  Commons,  in  1887,  by  Mr,  Raikes,  Postmaster 
General;  and  before  the  so-called  Tweedmouth  Com- 
mittee, 1897.  Instances  of  intervention  by  Members 
of  House  of  Commons  on  behalf  of  civil  servants  who 
have  not  been  promoted,  or  are  afraid  they  shall  not 
be  promoted. 

CHAPTER  XVI 

Members  of  the  House  of  Commons  intervene  on  behalf 

OF  Public  Servants  who  have  been  Disciplined         .    302 

Evidence  presented  before:  The  Royal  Commission 
appointed  to  inquire  into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888 ; 
and  the  Tweedmouth  Committee,  1897.  Instances  of 
intervention  by  Members  of  Parliament.  Mr.  Austen 
Chamberlain,  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  in 
April,  1902,  states  that  at  a  low  estimate  one-third  of 

XV 


CONTENTS 

the  time  of  the  highest  officials  in  the  Post  Office  is 
occupied  with  petty  questions  of  discipline  and  adminis- 
trative detail,  because  of  the  intervention  of  Members 
of  Parliament.  He  adds  that  it  is  "absolutely  deplor- 
able" that  time  and  energy  that  should  be  given  to  the 
consideration  of  large  questions  must  be  given  to 
matters  that  "in  any  private  business  would  be  dealt 
with  by  the  officer  on  the  spot."  Sir  John  Eldon 
Gorst's  testimony  before  the  Committee  on  National 
Expenditure,  1902. 

CHAPTER  XVII 

The  Spirit  of  the  Civil  Service  .  .  .  .323 
The  doctrine  of  an  "implied  contract"  between  the 
State  and  each  civil  servant,  to  the  effect  that  the  State 
may  make  no  change  in  the  manner  of  administering 
its  great  trading  departments  without  compensating 
every  civil  servant  however  remotely  or  indirectly 
affected.  The  hours  of  work  may  not  be  increased 
without  compensating  every  one  affected.  Administra- 
tive "mistakes"  may  not  be  corrected  without  compen- 
sating the  past  beneficiaries  of  such  mistakes.  Violation 
of  the  order  that  promotion  must  not  be  mechanical, 
or  by  seniority  alone,  may  not  be  corrected  without 
compensating  those  civil  servants  who  would  have  been 
benefitted  by  the  continued  violation  of  the  aforesaid 
order.  The  State  may  not  demand  increased  efficiency 
of  its  servants  without  compensating  every  one  affected. 
Persons  filling  positions  for  which  there  is  no  further 
need,  must  be  compensated.  Each  civil  servant  has  a 
"vested  right"  to  the  maintenance  of  such  rate  of  pro- 
motion as  obtains  when  he  enters  the  service,  irrespect- 
ive of  the  volume  of  business  or  of  any  diminution  in 
the  number  of  higher  posts  consequent  upon  adminis- 
trative reforms.  The  telegraph  clerks  demand  that 
their  chances  of  promotion  be  made  as  good  as  those 
of  the  postal  clerks  proper,  but  they  refuse  to  avail 
themselves  of  the  opportunity  to  pass  over  to  the  postal 
side  proper  of  the  service,  on  the  ground  that  the  postal 


CONTENTS 

duties  proper  are  more  irksome  than  the  telegraph 
duties.  Members  of  Parliament  support  recalcitrant 
telegraph  clerks  whom  the  Government  is  attempting  to 
force  to  learn  to  perform  postal  duties,  in  order  that  it 
may  reap  advantage  from  having  combined  the  postal 
service  and  the  telegraphs  in  1870.  Special  allowances 
may  not  be  discontinued;  and  vacations  may  not  be 
shortened,  without  safeguarding  all  "vested  interests." 
Further  illustrations  of  the  hopelessly  unbusiness-like 
spirit  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  public  servants. 

CHAPTER  XVIII 

The  House  of  Commons  stands  for  Extravagance  .  360 
Authoritative  character  of  the  evidence  tendered  by 
the  several  Secretaries  of  the  Treasury.  Testimony,  in 
1902,  of  Lord  Welby,  who  had  been  in  the  Treasury 
from  1856  to  1894.  Testimony  of  Sir  George  H. 
Murray,  Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office  and 
sometime  Private  Secretary  to  the  late  Prime  Minister, 
Mr.  Gladstone.  Testimony  of  Sir  Ralph  H.  Knox,  in 
the  War  Office  since  1882.  Testimony  of  Sir  Edward 
Hamilton,  Assistant  Secretary  to  the  Treasury  since 
1894.  Testimony  of  Mr.  R.  Chalmers,  a  Principal  Clerk 
in  the  Treasury;  and  of  Sir  John  Eldon  Gorst.  Mr. 
Gladstone's  tribute  to  Joseph  Hume,  the  first  and  last 
Member  of  the  House  of  Commons  competent  to  criti- 
cize effectively  the  details  of  expenditure  of  the  State. 
Evidence  presented  before  the  Select  Committee  on 
Civil  Services  Expenditure,  1873. 

CHAPTER  XIX 

Conclusion 378 

Index  ....••...    3Q3 


3cvn 


THE  BRITISH  STATE 
TELEGRAPHS 


CHAPTER  I 

Introduction 

SCOPE  OF  THE  INQUIRY 

The  story  of  the  British  State  Telegraphs  divides 
itself  into  two  parts :  the  purchase  of  the  telegraphs,  in 
1870,  from  the  companies  that  had  established  the  in- 
dustry of  telegraphy;  and  the  subsequent  conduct  of 
the  business  of  telegraphy  by  the  Government.  The 
first  part  is  covered  by  Chapters  II  to  VI ;  the  second 
part  by  the  remaining  chapters.  Both  parts  contain  a 
record  of  fact  and  experience  that  should  be  of  service 
to  the  American  public  at  the  present  moment,  when 
there  is  before  them  the  proposal  to  embark  upon  the 
policy  of  the  municipal  ownership  and  operation  of  the 
so-called  municipal  public  service  industries.  The 
second  part,  however,  will  interest  a  wider  body  of 
readers  than  the  first  part ;  for  it  deals  with  a  question 
that  is  of  profound  interest  and  importance  at  all 
times — the  problem  of  a  large  body  of  civil  servants 
in  a  Democracy. 

Chapters  II  to  VI  tell  of  the  demand  of  the  British 
Chambers  of  Commerce,  under  the  leadership  of  the 
Chamber  of  Commerce  of  Edinburgh,  for  lower  charges 

3 


4  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

on  telegraphic  messages;  the  appointment  by  the  Gov- 
ernment of  Mr.  Scudamore,  Second  Secretary  of  the 
Post  Office,  to  report  upon  the  relative  merits  of  private 
telegraphs  and  State  telegraphs;  the  character  of  the 
report  submitted  by  Mr.  Scudamore;  and  the  reasons 
why  that  report — upon  which  rested  the  whole  argu- 
ment for  nationalization — was  not  adequately  consid- 
ered either  by  the  Select  Committee  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  to  whom  the  Bill  for  the  purchase  of  the 
telegraphs  was  referred,  or  by  the  House  of  Commons 
itself.  The  principal  reason  was  that  the  agitation 
carried  on  by  the  Chambers  of  Commerce  and  the  news- 
paper press^  proved  so  successful  that  both  political 
parties  committed  themselves  to  nationalization  before 
Mr.  Scudamore's  report  had  been  submitted  to  search- 
ing criticism.  Under  the  circumstances,  the  Disraeli 
Ministry  was  unwilling  to  go  into  the  general  election 
of  1868  without  having  made  substantial  progress 
toward  the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs.  In  order 
to  remove  opposition  to  its  Bill  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, the  Disraeli  Ministry  conceded  practically  every- 
thing asked  by  the  telegraph  companies,  the  railway 
companies  and  the  newspaper  press.^  The  result  was 
that  the  Government  paid  a  high  price  absolutely  for 
the  telegraphs.  Whether  the  price  was  too  high,  rela- 
tively speaking,  is  difficult  to  say.     In  the  first  place, 

*  The  reason  for  the  opposition  of  the  newspaper  press  to  the 
telegraph  companies  is  discussed  in  Chapter  VIII. 

'The  concession  made  to  the  newspaper  press  is  described  in 
Chapter  VIII. 


INTRODUCTION  5 

the  price  paid — about  $40,000,000 — was  well  within 
the  sum  which  the  Government  had  said  it  could  afford 
to  pay,  to  wit,  $40,000,000  to  $50,000,000.  In  the  sec- 
ond place,  the  Government  acquired  an  industry  "ready- 
made,''  with  an  established  staff  of  highly  trained 
men  educated  in  the  school  of  competition — the  only 
school  that  thus  far  has  proved  itself  capable  of  bring- 
ing out  the  highest  efficiency  that  is  in  men.  In  the 
second  place,  the  Government  acquired  the  sole  right 
to  transmit  messages  by  electricity — a  right  which  sub- 
sequent events  have  proved  to  cover  all  future  inven- 
tions, such  as  the  transmission  of  messages  by  means 
of  the  telephone  and  of  wireless  telegraphy.  Finally, 
in  spite  of  the  wastefulness  that  characterized  the  Gov- 
ernment's operation  of  the  telegraphs  from  the  day  the 
telegraphs  were  taken  over,  the  Telegraph  Department 
in  the  year  1880-81  became  able  to  earn  more  than  the 
interest  upon  the  large  capital  invested  in  the  tele- 
graphs. But  from  that  year  on  the  Government  not 
only  became  more  and  more  wasteful,  but  also  lost 
control  over  the  charges  made  to  the  public  for  the 
transmission  of  messages.  It  is  instructive  to  note,  in 
this  latter  connection,  that  the  control  over  the  rates  to 
be  charged  to  the  public  was  taken  out  of  the  hands  of 
the  Government  by  Dr.  Cameron,  who  represented  in 
the  House  of  Commons  the  people  of  Glasgow,  and  that 
another  Scotch  city,  Edinburgh,  had  initiated  and 
maintained  the  campaign  for  the  nationalization  of  the 
telegraphs. 


6  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

One  of  the  most  extraordinary  of  the  astounding 
incidents  of  the  campaign  and  negotiations  that  re- 
sulted in  the  purchase  of  the  telegraphs,  was  the  fact 
that  in  the  debates  in  the  House  of  Commons  was  not 
even  raised  the  question  of  the  possibility  of  compli- 
cations and  dangers  arising  out  of  the  multiplication 
of  the  civil  servants.  That  fact  is  the  more  remark- 
able, since  the  leaders  of  both  political  parties  at  the 
time  apprehended  so  much  danger  from  the  existing 
civil  servants  that  they  refused  to  take  active  steps  to 
enfranchise  the  civil  servants  employed  in  the  so-called 
revenue  departments — the  customs,  inland  revenue 
and  Post  Office  departments — who  had  been  disfran- 
chised since  the  close  of  the  Eighteenth  Century. 
The  Bill  of  1868,  which  gave  the  franchise  to  the  civil 
servants  in  question,  was  a  Private  Bill,  introduced 
by  Mr.  Monk,  a  private  Member  of  the  House  of 
Commons ;  and  it  was  carried  against  the  protest  of  the 
Disraeli  Ministry,  and  without  the  active  support  of 
the  leading  men  in  the  Opposition. 

In  the  debates  upon  Mr.  Monk's  Bill,  Mr.  Gladstone, 
sitting  in  Opposition,  said  he  was  not  afraid  that  either 
political  party  ever  would  try  to  use  the  votes  of  the 
civil  servants  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  its  political 
fortunes,  "but  he  owned  that  he  had  some  apprehension 
of  what  might  be  called  class  influence  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  which  in  his  opinion  was  the  great  reproach 
of  the  Reformed  Parliament,  as  he  believed  history 
would  record.     Whether  they  were  going  to  emerge 


INTRODUCTION  7 

into  a  new  state  of  things  in  which  class  influence 
would  be  weaker,  he  knew  not ;  but  that  class  influence 
had  been  in  many  things  evil  and  a  scandal  to  them, 
especially  for  the  last  fifteen  or  twenty  years  [since  the 
Reform  of  Parliament]  ;  and  he  was  fearful  of  its  in- 
crease in  consequence  of  the  possession  of  the  fran- 
chise, through  the  power  which  men  who,  as  members 
of  a  regular  service,  were  already  organized,  might 
bring  to  bear  on  Members  of  Parliament." 

Chapters  VII  and  following  show  that  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's apprehensions  were  well-founded ;  that  the  civil 
servants  have  become  a  class  by  themselves,  with  inter-  / 
ests  so  widely  divergent  from  the  interests  of  the  rest 
of  the  community  that  they  do  not  distribute  their  \^^ 
allegiance  between  the  two  great  political  parties  on  the  / 
merits  of  the  respective  policies  of  those  parties,  as  do- 
an  equal  number  of  voters  taken  at  random.     The  civil! 
servants  have  organized  themselves  in  great  civil  serv- 
ice unions,   for  the  purpose  of  promoting  their  class 
interests  by  bringing  pressure  to  bear  upon  the  House 
of   Commons.     At   the   parliamentary   elections   they 
tend  to  vote  solidly  for  the  candidate  who  promises 
them  most.     In  one  constituency  they  will  vote  for  the 
Liberal  candidate,  in  another  for  the  Conservative  can- 
didate.  •  / 

Thus  far  neither  Party  appears  to  have  made  an 
open  or  definite  alliance  with  the  civil  servants.  But 
in  the  recent  years  in  which  the  Conservative  Party 
was  in  power,  and  year  after  year  denied — "on  prin- 


8  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

ciple"  of  public  policy — certain  requests  of  the  civil 
servants,  the  rank  and  file,  as  well  as  some  of  the  minor 
leaders  of  the  Liberal,  or  Opposition  Party,  evinced  a 
strong  tendency  to  vote  rather  solidly  in  the  House  of 
Commons  in  support  of  those  demands  of  the  civil 
servants.^  At  the  same  time  the  chiefs  of  the  Liberal, 
or  Opposition  Party,  refrained  from  the  debate  as  well 
as  from  the  vote.  It  may  be  that  the  Opposition  Party 
discipline  was  not  strong  enough  to  enable  the  Oppo- 
sition chiefs  to  prevent  the  votes  on  the  momentous 
issue  raised  in  the  House  of  Commons  by  the  civil  serv- 
ants from  becoming  for  all  practical  purposes  Party 
votes ;  or,  it  may  be  that  the  Liberal  Party  leaders  did 
not  deem  it  expedient  to  seek  to  control  the  voting  of 
their  followers.  Be  that  as  it  may,  the  fact  remains 
that  the  Conservative  Ministry  that  was  in  power,  re- 
peatedly called  in  vain  upon  the  House  of  Commons 
to  take  out  of  the  field  of  Party  politics  the  issue  raised 
by  the  civil  servants  in  the  period  from  1890  to  1905. 
The  Conservative  Ministry  year  after  year  denied  the 
request  of  the  Post  Office  employees  for  a  House  of 
Commons  Select  Committee  on  the  pay  and  position 
of  the  Post  Office  employees.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
support  of  that  request  came  steadily  from  the  Liberal 

*  The  efforts  of  the  civil  servants  culminated  in  the  debate  and 
vote  of  July  5,  1905.  Upon  that  occasion  there  voted  for  the  de- 
mands of  the  civil  servants  eighteen  Liberalists  who,  in  1905-6, 
became  Members  of  the  Sir  H.  Campbell-Bannerman  Liberal 
Ministry.  Two  of  them,  Mr.  Herbert  Gladstone  and  Mr.  Lloyd- 
George,  became  Members  of  the  Cabinet,  or  inner  circle  of  the 
Ministry. 


INTRODUCTION  9      ' 

Opposition.  In  the  General  Election  of  January,  1906, 
the  Post  Office  employees  threw  their  weight  over- 
whelmingly on  the  side  of  the  Liberal  Party ;  and  im- 
mediately after  the  opening  of  the  new  Parliament,  the 
newly  established  Liberal  Government  announced  that 
it  would  give  the  Post  Office  employees  the  House  of 
Commons  Select  Committee  which  the  late  Conserva- 
tive Ministry  had  "on  principle"  of  public  policy  re- 
fused to  grant. 

Shortly  after  the  General  Election  of  January,  1906,  \ 
the  President  of  the  Postal  Telegraph  Clerks'  Asso-  \ 
ciation,  a  powerful  political  organization,  stated  that  I 
nearly  450  of  the  670  Members  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons had  pledged  themselves,  in  the  course  of  the  cam- 
paign, to  vote  for  a  House  of  Commons  Select  Com- 
mittee. At  about  the  same  time,  Lord  Balcarres,  a 
Conservative  whip  in  the  late  Balfour  ministry,  speak- 
ing of  the  281  members  who  entered  Parliament  for 
the  first  time  in  1906,  said  "he  thought  he  was  fairly 
accurate  when  he  said  that  they  had  given  pretty  spe- 
cific pledges  upon  this  matter  [of  a  Select  Committee] 
to  those  who  had  sent  them  to  the  House."  Sir  Ac- 
land-Hood,  chief  whip  in  the  late  Balfour  Ministry, 
added :  " .  .  . .  nearly  the  whole  of  the  supporters  of  the 
then  [1905]  Government  voted  against  the  appointment 
of  the  Select  Committee  [in  July,  1905].  No  doubt 
many  of  them  suffered  for  it  at  the  general  election; 
they  either  lost  their  seats  or  had  their  majorities  re- 
duced in  consequence  of  the  vote."    And  the  new  Prime 


10  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Minister,  Sir  H.  Campbell-Bannerman,  spoke  of  the 
"retroactive  effect  of  old  promises  extracted  in  mo- 
ments of  agony  from  candidates  at  the  general  elec- 
tion." And  finally,  at  the  annual  conference  of  the 
Postal  Telegraph  Clerks'  Association,  held  in  March, 
1906,  Mr.  R.  S.  Davis,  the  representative  of  the  Metro- 
politan London  Telegraph  Clerks,  said :  "The  new 
Postmaster  General  had  made  concessions  which  had 
almost  taken  them  [the  postal  clerks]  off  their  feet  by 
the  rapidity  with  which  one  had  succeeded  another 
and  the  manner  in  which  they  were  granted." 

Chapters  XIV  to  XVII  describe  the  efforts  made  by 
the  civil  servants  to  secure  exemption  from  the  ordi- 
nary vicissitudes  of  life,  as  well  as  exemption  from  the 
necessity  of  submitting  to  those  standards  of  efficiency 
and  those  rules  of  discipline  which  prevail  in  private 
employment.  They  show  the  hopelessly  unbusiness- 
like spirit  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  public  servants,  a 
spirit  fostered  by  the  practice  of  members  of  the  House 
of  Commons  intervening,  from  the  floor  of  the  House 
as  well  as  behind  the  scenes,  on  behalf  of  public  serv- 
ants who  have  not  been  promoted,  have  been  disci- 
plined or  dismissed,  or,  have  failed  to  persuade  the 
executive  officers  to  observe  one  or  more  of  the  peculiar 
claims  of  "implied  contract"  and  "vested  right"  which 
make  the  British  public  service  so  attractive  to  those 
men  whose  object  in  life  is  not  to  secure  full  and  un- 
trammeled  scope  for  their  abilities  and  ambitions,  but 


INTRODUCTION  11 

a  haven  of  refuge  from  the  ordinary  vicissitudes  of  life. 
Members  of  the  House  of  Commons  intervene,  in  the 
manner  indicated,  in  mere  matters  of  detail  of  admin- 
istration, because  they  have  not  the  courage  to  refuse 
to  obey  the  behests  of  the  political  leaders  of  the  civil 
service  unions ;  they  do  not  so  interfere  from  the  mere 
desire  to  promote  their  political  fortunes  by  champion- 
ing the  interests  of  a  class.  They  recognize  the  fact 
that  the  art  of  government  is  the  art  of  log-rolling,  of 
effecting  the  best  compromise  possible,  under  the  given 
conditions  of  political  intelligence  and  public  spirit,  be- 
tween the  Interests  of  a  class  and  the  interests  of  the 
country  as  a  whole.  Their  views  were  forcibly  ex- 
pressed, on  a  recent  occasion,  by  Captain  Norton,  who 
long  has  been  one  of  the  most  aggressive  champions 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  of  the  civil  servants,  and 
who,  at  present,  is  a  Junior  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  in 
the  Sir  H.  Campbell-Bannerman  Liberal  Ministry. 
Said  Captain  Norton:  "As  regarded  what  had  been 
said  about  undue  influence  [being  exercised  by  the  civil 
servants] ,  his  contention  was  that  so  long  as  the  postal 
officials ....  were  allowed  to  maintain  a  vote,  they 
had  precisely  the  same  rights  as  all  other  voters  in  the 
country  to  exercise  their  fullest  influence  in  the  de- 
fense of  their  rights,  privileges  and  interests.  He 
might  mention  that  all  classes  of  all  communities,  of  all 
professions,  all  trades,  all  combinations  of  individuals, 
such  as  anti- vaccinationists  and  so  forth,  had  invari- 
ably used  their  utmost  pressure  in  defense  of  their 


12  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

interests  and  views  upon  members  of  the  House. . . " 
The  problem  of  government  in  every  country — ^ir- 
respectively of  the  form  which  the  political  institutions 
may  take  in  any  given  country — is  to  avoid  class  legis- 
lation, and  to  make  it  impossible  for  any  one  class  to 
exploit  the  others.  Some  of  us — who  are  old-fash- 
ioned and  at  present  in  the  minority — believe  that  the 
solution  of  that  problem  is  to  be  found  only  in  the  up- 
building of  the  character  and  the  intelligence  of  the  in- 
dividual citizen.  Others  believe  that  it  is  to  be  found 
largely,  if  not  mainly,  in  extending  the  functions  of 
the  State  and  the  City.  To  the  writer,  the  experience 
of  Great  Britain  under  the  experiment  of  the  extension 
of  the  functions  of  the  State  and  the  City,  seems  to 
teach  once  more  the  essential  soundness  of  the  doctrine 
that  the  nation  that  seeks  refuge  from  the  ills  that 
appear  under  the  policy  of  laissez-faire,  seeks  refuge 
from  such  ills  in  the  apparently  easy,  and  therefore 
tempting,  device  of  merely  changing  the  form  of  its 
political  institutions  and  political  ideals,  will  but  change 
the  form  of  the  ills  from  which  it  suffers. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  ARGUMENT  FOR  THE  NATIONALIZATION  OF 
THE  TELEGRAPHS' 

The  indictment  of  the  telegraph  companies.  The  argument 
from  foreign  experience.  The  promise  of  reduced  tariffs  and 
increased  facilities.  The  alleged  financial  success  of  foreign  State 
telegraphs:  Belgium,  Switzerland  and  France.  The  argument 
from  British  company  experience. 

In  1856  the  Chambers  of  Commerce  of  Great  Brit- 
ain, under  the  leadership  of  the  Chamber  of  Commerce 
of  Edinburgh,  began  an  agitation  for  the  purchase  by 
the  Government  of  the  properties  of  the  several  British 
telegraph  companies.  In  1865,  the  telegraph  compa- 
nies, acting  in  unison,  withdrew  the  reduced  rate  of 
twenty-four  cents  for  twenty  words,  address  free,  that 
had  been  in  force,  since  1861,  between  certain  large 
cities.  That  action,  which  will  be  described  further  on, 
caused  the  Chambers  of  Commerce  to  increase  the  agi- 
tation for  State  purchase.  In  September,  1865,  Lord 
Stanley  of  Alderley,  Postmaster  General,  commissioned 
Mr.  F.  I.  Scudamore,  Second  Secretary  of  the  Post 
Office,  "to  inquire  and  report  whether,  in  his  opinion, 
the  electric  telegraph  service  might  be  beneficially 
worked  by  the  Post  Office — whether,  if  so  worked,  it 

13 


14:  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

would  possess  any  advantages  over  a  system  worked 
by  private  companies — and  whether  it  would  entail  any 
very  large  expenditure  on  the  Post  Office  Department 
beyond  the  purchase  of  existing  rights." 

In  July,  1866,  Mr.  Scudamore  reported,  recommend- 
ing the  purchase  of  the  telegraphs.  In  February,  1868, 
he  submitted  a  supplementary  report;  and  in  1868  and 
1869,  he  acted  as  the  chief  witness  for  the  Government 
before  the  Parliamentary  Committees  appointed  to  re- 
port on  the  Gk)vernment's  Bills  proposing  to  authorize 
the  State  to  acquire  and  operate  the  telegraphs.^  The 
extent  to  which  the  Government,  throughout  the  con- 
siderations and  negotiations  which  finally  ended  in  the 
nationalization  of  the  telegraphs,  relied  almost  exclu- 
sively upon  evidence  supplied  by  Mr.  Scudamore,  is 
indicated  in  the  statement  made  by  the  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer,  Mr.  G.  W.  Hunt,  on  July  21,  1868, 
that  Mr.  Scudamore  "might  be  said  to  be  the  author  of 
the  Bill  to  acquire  the  telegraphs."^ 

Mr.  Scudamore  reported  that  the  Chambers  of  Com- 
merce, and  the  various  writers  in  the  periodical  and 

^A  Report  to  the  Postmaster  General  upon  Certain  Proposals 
which  have  been  made  for  transferring  to  the  Post  Office  the  Con- 
trol and  Management  of  the  Electric  Telegraphs  throughout  the 
United  Kingdom,  July,  1868;  Supplementary  Report  to  the  Post- 
master General  upon  the  Proposal  for  transferring  to  the  Post 
OMce  the  Control  and  Management  of  the  Electric  Telegraphs, 
February,  i868;  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the 
Electric  Telegraphs  Bill,  1868 ;  and  Report  from  the  Select  Com- 
mittee on  the  Telegraphic  Bill,  1869. 

Unless  otherwise  stated,  all  the  material  statements  made  in 
this  chapter   are  taken   from   the   foregoing  official   documents. 

'Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  21,    1868,  p.   1,603. 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION  15 

newspaper  press  who  had  supported  the  proposal  of 
State  purchase,  had  concurred  in  the  following  general 
Indictment  of  Propositions:  "that  the  charges  made 
the  Telegraph  by  the  telegraph  companies  were  too 
Companies  j^jg-j^^  ^^^  tended  to  check  the  growth 

of  telegraphic  correspondence ;  that  there  were  frequent 
delays  of  messages ;  that  many  important  districts  were 
unprovided  with  telegraphic  facilities;  that  in  many 
places  the  telegraph  office  was  inconveniently  remote 
from  the  centre  of  business,  and  was  open  for  too  small 
a  portion  of  the  day;  that  little  or  no  improvement 
could  be  expected  so  long  as  the  working  of  the  tele- 
graphs was  conducted  by  commercial  companies  striv- 
ing chiefly  to  earn  a  dividend  and  engaged  in  wasteful 
competition  with  each  other;  and,  finally,  that  the 
growth  of  telegraphic  correspondence  had  been  greatly 
stimulated  in  Belgium  and  Switzerland  by  the  annexa- 
tion of  the  telegraphs  to  the  Post  Offices  of  those 
countries,  and  the  consequent  adoption  of  a  low  scale 
of  charges ;  and  that  in  Great  Britain  like  results  would 
follow  the  adoption  of  like  means,  and  that  from  the 
annexation  of  the  British  telegraphs  to  the  British  Post 
Office  there  would  accrue  great  advantage  to  the  public, 
and  ultimately  a  large  revenue  to  the  State."  Subse- 
quently, before  the  Select  Committees  of  Parliament, 
Mr.  Scudamore  maintained  that  in  the  hands  of  the 
State  the  telegraphs  would  pay  from  the  start. 

Mr.  Scudamore  continued  his  report  with  the  state- 
ment that  he  had  satisfied  himself  that  in  Great  Britain 


16  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  telegraph  was  not  in  such  general  use  as  upon  the 
Continent;  that  "the  class  who  used  the  telegraphs 
most  freely  were  stock  brokers,  mining  agents,  ship 
brokers,  Colonial  brokers,  racing  and  betting  men,  fruit 
merchants  and  others  engaged  in  business  of  a  specula- 
tive character,  or  who  deal  in  articles  of  a  perishable 
nature.  Even  general  merchants  used  the  telegraphs 
comparatively  little,  compared  with  those  engaged  in 
the  more  speculative  branches  of  commerce."  He 
added  that  from  1862  to  1868  the  annual  increase  in 
the  number  of  telegraphic  messages  had  ranged  pretty 
evenly  from  25  per  cent,  to  30  per  cent.,  indicating 
merely  a  gradual  increase  in  the  telegraphic  correspond- 
ence of  those  classes  who  had  been  the  first  to  use 
the  telegraphs.  He  said  there  had  been  none  of  those 
"sudden  and  prodigious  jumps"  that  had  occurred  on 
the  Continent  after  each  reduction  in  the  charges  for 
telegraphic  messages,  or  after  each  extension  of  the 
telegraph  system  to  the  smaller  towns. 

Mr.  Scudamore  held  that  it  was  a  serious  indictment 
of  the  manner  in  which  the  telegraph  companies  had 
discharged  their  duties  to  the  public,  that  the  small 
tradesman  had  not  learned  to  order  goods  by  telegraph, 
and  had  not  thereby  enabled  himself  to  get  along  with  a 
smaller  stock  of  goods  kept  constantly  on  hand ;  that  the 
fishing  villages  on  the  remote  coasts  of  Scotland  that 
had  no  railways,  had  no  telegraphs ;  that  the  public  did 
not  send  "millions  of  messages"  of  this  kind :  "I  shall 
not  be  home  to  dinner ;"  "I  will  bring  down  some  fish ;" 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION  17 

"You  can  meet  me  at  four ;"  and  that  the  wife  and  chil- 
dren, away  from  their  home  in  the  country  village,  did 
not  telegraph  to  the  husband  and  father:  "Send  me  a 
money  order."  Mr.  Scudamore's  notions  of  the  uses 
to  which  the  telegraphs  ought  to  be  put  were  shared 
by  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Mr.  Hunt,  who 
looked  forward  to  the  day  when  "persons  who  have  a 
difficulty  in  writing  letters  will  have  less  difficulty  in 
going  to  a  telegraph  office  and  sending  a  message  to  a 
friend  than  writing  a  letter."^ 

Mr.  Scudamore  supported  his  position  with  the  sub- 
joined reports  from  countries  in  which  the  State 
operated  the  telegraphs.  The  Danish  Government  had 
reported  that  the  telegraph  was  used  by  merchants  gen- 
erally and  for  social  and  domestic  purposes.  Prussia 
Argument  from  ^^^  reported  that  in  the  early  days. 
Foreign  when  the  charges  had  been  high,  the  use 

Experience  ^^  ^^^  telegraph  had  been  confined  al- 

most exclusively  to  bankers,  brokers,  large  commercial 
houses  and  newspaper  correspondents,  but  that  with 
each  reduction  in  the  charges,  or  extension  of  the  tele- 
graphs to  small  towns,  the  number  of  those  who  regu- 
larly sent  out  and  received  messages  had  increased  con- 
siderably. Switzerland  had  reported  that  messages 
relating  to  personal  business  and  family  affairs  formed 
as  important  a  part  of  the  whole  traffic  as  the  messages 
of    banking    interests    and    other    trading    interests. 

^  special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric 
Telegraphs  Bill,  1868;  q.  2549  and  1581. 


OF  ^HE 

UNIVERSITY  i 


18  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

France  had  reported  that  38  per  cent,  of  the  messages 
related  to  personal  business  and  family  affairs;  and 
Belgium  had  reported  that  nearly  59  per  cent,  of  the 
messages  related  to  personal  business  and  family  affairs. 

To  indicate  the  manner  in  which  the  use  of  the  tele- 
graph increased  with  reductions  in  the  charges  made, 
Mr.  Scudamore  reported  that  in  Belgium,  in  1863,  a 
reduction  of  33  per  cent,  in  the  charge  had  been  followed 
by  an  increase  of  80  per  cent,  in  the  number  of  tele- 
grams; and  that,  in  1866,  a  reduction  of  50  per  cent, 
in  the  charges  had  been  followed  by  an  increase  of  85 
per  cent,  in  the  trafific.  In  France,  in  1862,  a  reduction 
of  35  per  cent,  in  the  charge,  had  led  to  an  increase  of 
64  per  cent,  in  the  number  of  messages.  In  Switzer- 
land, in  1868,  a  reduction  of  50  per  cent,  in  the  charge 
had  been  followed,  in  the  next  three  months,  by  an  in- 
crease in  business  of  90  per  cent.  In  Prussia,  in  1867, 
a  reduction  of  the  charge  by  33  per  cent,  had,  in  the 
first  month,  increased  the  number  of  messages  by  70  per 
cent.  The  increase  in  business  always  had  followed 
immediately,  said  Mr.  Scudamore,  showing  that  new 
classes  of  people  took  up  the  use  of  the  telegraphs. 

Finally,  Mr.  Scudamore  stated  that  in  1866,  the  pro- 
portion borne  by  the  total  of  telegrams  sent  to  the  ag- 
gregate of  letters  sent,  had  been :  in  Belgium,  one  tele- 
gram for  every  37  letters ;  in  Switzerland,  one  telegram 
for  every  69  letters;  and  in  the  United  Kingdom,  one 
telegram  for  every  121  letters.  The  relative  failure  of 
the  people  of  the  United  Kingdom  to  use  the  telegraph 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION  19 

freely,  Mr.  Scudamore  ascribed  to  the  high  charges 
made  by  the  telegraph  companies,  and  to  the  restricted 
faciHties  offered  by  the  companies. 

In  1868,  the  British  companies  were  charging  24 
cents  for  a  twenty-word  message,  over  distances  not 
exceeding  100  miles;  36  cents  for  distances  between 
100  and  200  miles ;  and  48  cents  for  distances  exceeding 
200  miles.  For  messages  passing  between  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland,  the  charge  ranged  from  $0.72  to 
$1.44.  In  all  cases  the  addresses  of  the  sender  and  of 
the  sendee  were  carried  free. 

The  Government  proposed  to  make  a  uniform  charge 

of  24  cents  for  twenty  words,  irrespective  of  distance. 

Mr.  Scudamore  stated  that  he  fully  expected  that  in  two 

or  three  years  the  Government  would  reduce  its  charge 

to  12  cents.     The  only  reason  why  the  Government  did 

not  propose  to  adopt  immediately  the  last  mentioned 

rate,  was  the  desire  not  to  overcrowd 
Promise  of 
Lower  the  telegraphs  at  the  start  before  there 

Charges  and        had  been  the  chance  to  learn  with  what 
volume  of  traffic  the  existing  plant  and 
staff  could  cope.^ 

In  1868  there  was  in  the  United  Kingdom  one  tele- 
graph office  for  every  13,000  people.  The  Govern- 
ment promised  to  inaugurate  the  nationalization  of  the 
telegraphs  by  giving  one  office  for  every  6,000  people.^ 

*  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868;  q.  2508;  and  Report  from  the  Select  Committee 
on  the  Telegraphic  Bill,  1869  ;  q.  346. 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Telegraphic  Bill,  1869 ; 
q.  327  ;  and  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Elec- 
tric Telegraphs  Bill,  1868;  q.  88. 


20  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

In  the  shortest  time  possible,  the  Government  would 
open  a  telegraph  office  at  every  money  order  issuing 
Post  Office.  At  that  time  the  practice  was  to  establish 
a  money  order  office  wherever  there  was  the  prospect 
of  two  money  orders  being  issued  a  day ;  and  in  some 
instances  such  offices  were  established  on  the  prospect 
of  one  order  a  day. 

The  contention  that  the  public  interest  demanded  a 
great  increase  in  the  number  of  telegraph  offices,  Mr. 
Scudamore  supported  by  citing  the  number  of  offices  in 
Belgium  and  France.  In  the  former  country  there  were 
upward  of  125  telegraph  offices  which  despatched  less 
than  one  telegram  a  day.  In  fact,  some  offices  des- 
patched less  than  one  a  month.  The  Belgium  Govern- 
ment, in  figuring  the  cost  of  the  Telegraph  Department, 
charged  that  Department  nothing  whatever  for  office 
rent,  or  for  fire,  light  and  office  fittings;  nor  did  it 
charge  the  smaller  offices  anything  for  the  time  given 
by  the  State  Railway  employees  and  the  postal  employ- 
ees to  the  Telegraph  Department.  In  France  there 
were  301  telegraph  offices  that  took  in  less  than  $40  a 
year;  179  offices  that  took  in  from  $40  to  $100;  and 
185  offices  that  took  in  from  $100  to  $200. 

Mr.  Scudamore  over  and  again  assured  the  Parlia- 
mentary Select  Committee  of  1868  that  the  telegraphs 
in  the  hands  of  the  State  would  be  self-supporting  from 
the  start,  and  that  ultimately  they  would  be  a  consider- 
able source  of  revenue,  ^ut  he  supported  his  indict- 
ment of  the  telegraph  companies  of  the  United  King- 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION  21 

dom  by  drawing  upon  the  experience  of  the  State 
telegraphs  of  Belgium,  Switzerland,  and  France, 
under  very  low  rates  on  inland  telegrams,  as  distin- 
guished from  telegrams  in  transit,  or  telegrams  to  and 
from  foreign  countries.  In  taking  that  course,  Mr. 
Scudamore  ignored  the  fact  that  the  inland  rates  in 
question  were  not  remunerative. 

The  Belgium  State  telegraphs  had  been  opened  in 
1850.  In  the  years  1850  to  1856,  they  had  earned, 
upon  an  average,  36.8  per  cent,  a  year  upon  their  cost. 
In  the  period  1857  to  1862,  they  had  earned,  upon  an 
average,  24.3  per  cent.  In  1863  tO'  1865,  the  annual 
earnings  fell  to  an  average  of  13.5  per  cent.;  and  in 
1866  to  1869,  they  reached  an  average  of  2.8  per  cent, 
only.  The  reasons  for  that  rapid  and  steady  decline 
of  the  net  earnings  were:  the  opening  of  relatively 
unprofitable  lines  and  offices ;  increases  in  wages  which 
the  Government  could  not  withhold;  a  slackening  in 
Belgium's  the  rate  of  growth  of  the  profits  on 

Experience  the    so-called    foreign    messages    and 

transit  messages;  and  a  rapid  increase  in  the  losses 
upon  the  inland  messages,  which  were  carried  at  low 
rates  for  the  purpose  of  stimulating  traffic. 

At  an  early  date  the  Belgium  Government  con- 
cluded that  the  first  three  of  the  four  factors  just 
enumerated  were  beyond  the  control  of  the  State,  and 
therefore  permanent.  It  resolved,  therefore,  to  at- 
tempt to  neutralize  them  by  developing  the  inland  traffic 
to  such  proportions  that  it  should  become  a  source  of 


22  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

profit,  that  traffic  having  been,  up  to  that  time,  a  source 
of  loss.  Accordingly,  on  January  ist,  1863,  the 
Government  lowered  the  charge  on  inland  messages 
from  30  cents  for  20  words,  addresses  included,  to  20 
cents.  As  that  reduction  did  not  prove  sufficiently 
effective,  the  charge  on  inland  messages  was  reduced, 
on  December  ist,  1865,  to  10  cents  for  20  words. 
Under  that  reduction  the  loss  incurred  upon  the  inland 
messages  rose  from  an  annual  average  of  $13,800  in 
1863  to  1865,  to  an  annual  average  of  $59,500  in  1866 
to  1869;  and  the  average  annual  return  upon  the  cap- 
ital invested  fell  to  2.8  per  cent.  This  evidence  was 
before  Mr.  Scudamore  when  he  argued  from  the  ex- 
perience of  Belgium  in  favor  of  a  uniform  rate,  irre- 
spective of  distance,  of  24  cents  for  20  words,  not 
counting  the  addresses.  Mr.  Scudamore  shared  the 
opinion  of  the  Belgium  Government  that  the  rate  of 
10  cents  would  so  stimulate  the  traffic  as  to  become 
very  profitable.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  things  went  from 
bad  to  worse  in  Belgium,  and  for  many  years  the 
Belgian  State  telegraphs  failed  to  earn  operating  ex- 
penses.^ 

By  way  of  explanation  it  should  be  added  that  the 
so-called  transit  messages  and  foreign  messages  were 
profitable  for  two  reasons.  In  the  first  place,  the  Bel- 
gian Government  kept  high  the  rates  on  those  mes- 
sages.    In  the  second  place,  those  messages  are  car- 


*  Supplementary  Report  to  the  Postmaster  General  upon  the  Pro- 
posal for  transferring  to  the  Post  Office   the  Control  and  Manage- 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION 


23 


ried  much  more  cheaply  than  inland  messages.  The 
transit  messages,  say  from  Germany  to  England,  have 
only  to  be  retransmitted;  they  are  not  received  across 
the  counter,  nor  are  they  delivered  across  the  counter 
and  by  messenger.  The  foreign  messages  are  burdened 
with  only  one  of  the  two  foregoing  relatively  costly 
operations.  In  1866  the  Belgian  Government  stated 
that,  if  the  cost  to  the  Telegraph  Department  of  a 
given  number  of  words  transmitted  as  a  message  in 
transit  be  represented  by  two,  the  corresponding  cost 
of  the  same  number  of  words  received  and  transmitted 
as  a  foreign  message  would  be  represented  by  three, 
while  the  cost  of  the  same  number  of  words  received 

ment  of  the  Electric  Telegraphs,  1868;  and  Sir  James  Anderson,  in 
Journal  of  the  Statistical  Society,  September,  1872. 

Belgian   State  Telegraphs 


Inland  messages 

Foreign  Messages 

Messages  in 

transit 

V 

s 

2     « 

u  «  m 

V 

^     en 

E 

(0  4j  en 

«   a 

s 

5  S 

.n't.  rt 

0)   <0   OT 

.S.I 

a 

Cents 


i860 

42.0 

35.4 

6.8 

25.4 

49.0 

23.6 

16.8 

60.6 

43.8 

I86I 

38.4 

35.0 

3.4 

23.0 

44.8 

21.8 

15.4 

57-0 

41.6 

1862 

39.4 

33.6 

5.8 

23.6 

43-2 

19.6 

15.8 

52.2 

36.4 

1863 

30.0 

22.4 

7.6 

18.0 

34.0 

16.0 

12.0 

38.0 

26.0 

1864 

27.0 

22.4 

4.6 

16.2 

31.2 

15.0 

10.8 

41.2 

30.4 

186s 

25.4 

20.8 

4.6 

15-2 

27.0 

11.8 

10.2 

40.4 

30.2 

1866 

18.0 

II.8 

6.2 

10.8 

23-4 

12.6 

7.2 

28.6 

21.4 

1867 

18.2 

11.6 

6.6 

II. 0 

24.0 

13.0 

7.2 

29.2 

22.0 

1868 

18.4 

11.4 

7.0 

II.O 

22.4 

11.4 

7-4 

29.0 

21.6 

1869 

17.2 

10.8 

6.4 

10.2 

21.2 

II.O 

6.8 

29.0 

22.2 

24  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

and  transmitted  as  an  inland  message  would  be  repre- 
sented by  five. 

The  Swiss  State  telegraphs,  the  experience  of  which 
Mr.  Scudamore  also  cited  in  support  of  his  Report, 
were  opened  in  1852;  and  in  the  period  from  1854  to 
1866  they  earned,  on  an  average,  18  per  cent,  upon 
their  cost.  Throughout  that  period  the  average 
receipts  per  inland  messages  were  21  cents,  and  the 
average  receipts  per  foreign  message  were  39  cents. 
In  the  year  1865  the  average  receipts  per  message 
were  21  cents  for  inland  messages,  and  30  cents  for 
foreign  and  transit  messages,  which  constituted  39  per 
Swiss  Ex-  cent,  of  the  traffic.     In  the  following 

perience  year,   1 866,  the  average  receipts  upon 

the  inland  traffic  remained  unchanged ;  while  those  up- 
on the  foreign  and  transit  traffic,  43  per  cent,  of  the 
total  traffic,  fell  to  20  cents.  This  reduction  of  33  per 
cent,  in  the  average  receipts  upon  the  foreign  and 
transit  traffic,  caused  a  decline  of  45  per  cent,  in  the 
total  net  receipts,  and  reduced  the  earnings  upon  the 
capital  from  15.2  per  cent,  in  1865,  to  7.5  per  cent,  in 
1866. 

Thus  far  the  receipts  from  the  inland  messages  had 
not  covered  the  operating  expenses  incurred  on  account 
of  those  messages.  The  profits,  which  had  been  very 
large,  had  come  from  the  foreign  messages  and  mes- 
sages in  transit.^  The  Government,  alarmed  at  the 
decline  in  profits  resulting  from  the  fall  in  the  average 

*Archiv  fur  Post  und  Telegraphic,  1903,  p.  577. 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION  25 

receipts  per  message  in  the  foreign  and  transit  traffic, 
resolved  upon  a  special  effort  to  stimulate  the  growth 
of  the  inland  traffic.  Accordingly,  on  January  ist, 
1868,  it  lowered  the  rates  on  inland  messages  of  20 
words,  address  counted,  from  20  cents  to  10  cents. 
The  inland  traffic  immediately  doubled;  but  the  cost 
of  handling  it  more  than  doubled.  The  increase  in 
the  traffic  necessitated  the  stringing  of  additional 
wires,  and  the  employment  of  more  instruments,  line- 
men, telegraphers  and  office  clerks.  At  the  same  time 
the  Government  was  obliged  to  concede  all  round  in- 
creases of  wages  and  salaries,  in  consequence  of  the 
general  increase  in  the  cost  of  living  which  accom- 
panied the  world-wide  revival  of  trade  ushered  in  by 
the  discovery  of  gold  in  California  and  Australia,  the 
introduction  of  steamships  upon  the  high  seas,  and 
the  building  of  railways  in  all  parts  of  the  world. 

The  inland  messages  increased  by  leaps  and  bounds 
from  397,289  in  1867  to  2,118,373  in  1876;  and  still 
the  receipts  from  them  did  not  cover  the  operating 
expenses.  In  1874  and  1875,  for  example,  those  ex- 
penses averaged  14  cents  per  message.  Accordingly, 
in  1877,  the  Government  adopted  a  new  scale  of 
charges  on  inland  messages,  to  wit:  an  initial  charge 
of  6  cents  per  message,  to  which  was  added  0.5  cent 
for  every  word  transmitted.  The  Government  as- 
sumed that  the  average  length  of  the  inland  messages 
would  be  14  words;  and  that  the  average  receipts  per 
message  would  be  13  cents.     It  hoped  soon  to  reduce 


26  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  average  cost  per  message  below  13  cents,  and 
hoped  thus  to  make  the  inland  traffic  remunerative. 
But  those  expectations  never  were  realized;  and  to 
this  day  the  inland  messages  have  been  carried  at  a 
loss.^ 

In  1 86 1,  the  French  State  telegraphs  reduced  the 
rate  for  messages  of  20  words,  counting  the  address, 
to  20  cents  for  intradepartmentaP  messages,  and  to  40 
cents  for  interdepartmental  messages.  In  1866  the 
average  receipts  per  message  were:  38  cents  on  the 
French  Ex-  inland    traffic;    $1.38    on    the    foreign 

perience  traffic;  and  55.8  cents  on  the  traffic  as 

a  whole.  With  these  average  receipts  per  message, 
the  earnings  were  $1,541,519;  while  the  operating 
expenses  were  $1,796,692.  In  other  words,  the  State 
telegraphs  lost  $255,173  on  the  working,  besides  fail- 
ing to  earn  any  interest  on  the  capital  invested  in  them, 
$4,760,000. 

In  making  the  foregoing  statement,  no  allowance 
is  made  for  the  value  of  the  messages  sent  "on  public 
service,"  messages  for  which  the  State  would  have 
been  obliged  to  pay,  had  the  telegraphs  been  owned  or 
operated  by  companies.  No  such  allowance  can  be 
made,  because  the  several  official  French  statements 
submitted  by  Mr.  Scudamore  as  to  the  number  of 
messages  sent  "on  public  service"  applied  to  the  years 
1865  and  1867,  years  for  which  the  operating  expenses 

^  Archiv  fur  Post  und  Telegraphie,  1903,  p.  574. 
^  For   administrative   purposes   France   is   divided   into   so-called 
"Departments." 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION  27 

were  not  given.  Furthermore,  the  messages  sent  on 
pubHc  service  in  1865  and  1867  were  so  numerous  as  to 
indicate  so  loose  a  construction  of  the  term  "on  public 
service"  as  to  make  the  returns  worthless  for  the  pur- 
pose of  determining  the  commercial  value  of  the  sav- 
ing resulting  to  the  State  from  the  public  ownership 
of  the  telegraphs.  For  1865,  the  number  of  messages 
"on  public  service"  was  returned  as  568,647,  the 
equivalent  of  23  per  cent,  of  the  number  of  messages 
sent  by  the  public.  For  1867,  the  number  was  re- 
turned as  168,999,  the  equivalent  of  5.94  per  cent,  of 
the  messages  sent  by  the  public.  That  those  figures 
represented  an  unreasonable  resource  to  the  telegraph 
for  the  transaction  of  the  State's  business,  is  proved 
by  the  fact  that  in  the  United  Kingdom,  in  the  period 
1 87 1  to  1890,  the  value  of  the  messages  sent  "on  pub- 
lic service"  was  equivalent  to  less  than  2  per  cent,  of 
the  sums  paid  by  the  public  for  the  transmission  of 
telegraphic  messages.  On  the  basis  of  any  reason- 
able use  of  the  telegraphs  "on  public  service,"  the 
financial  results  of  the  French  State  telegraphs  would 
not  have  been  altered  materially.  The  deficit,  in  1866, 
on  account  of  operating  expenses,  $255,173,  was  suf- 
ficient to  permit  of  the  sending  of  457,300  messages 
"on  public  service,"  the  equivalent  of  16  per  cent,  of 
the  messages  sent  by  the  public.  It  would  be  un- 
reasonable to  assume  that  the  State  could  have  need  of 
such  recourse  to  the  telegraphs. 

To  sum  up  the  evidence  from  Belgium,  Switzerland, 


28  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

and  France,  submitted  by  Mr.  Scudamore  in  1866  to 
1869:  This  evidence  was  that  rates  of  20  cents  and  10 

Summary  of  ^^"^^  ^^^  ^^  ^^^^S'  appHed  to  inland 
Foreign  Ex-  messages,  developed  an  enormous  in- 

perience  ^^^^   ^^^^^^   y^^^   ^j^^^   ^j^^^   ^^^^^   ^^S 

unremunerative.  So  long  as  the  rates  on  foreign  mes- 
sages and  transit  messages  had  remained  very  much 
higher  than  the  rates  on  inland  messages,  the  Belgian 
and  Swiss  State  telegraphs  had  paid  handsomely. 
But  as  soon  as  the  latter  rates  had  approached  the  level 
of  the  former  rates,  the  net  revenue  had  tumbled  head- 
long; and  there  was,  in  1868  and  1869,  no  certainty 
that  it  would  not  disappear  entirely,  or  be  reduced  to 
such  proportions  as  no  longer  to  afford  an  adequate 
return  upon  the  capital  invested  in  the  telegraphs.  In 
the  case  of  France,  no  evidence  was  presented  that  the 
State  telegraphs  ever  had  paid  their  way,  though  the 
prices  obtained  for  the  transmission  of  foreign  mes- 
sages and  transit  messages  were  between  three  and 
four  times  the  returns  obtained  from  the  transmission 
of  inland  messages. 

While  the  evidence  from  Belgium,  Switzerland  and 
France,  presented  by  Mr.  Scudamore,  did  not  support 
the  proposition  of  a  low  uniform  rate,  irrespective  of 
distance,  the  evidence  furnished  by  the  experience  of 
the  telegraph  companies  of  the  United  Kingdom 
pointed  strongly  to  the  conclusion  that  a  uniform  rate, 
irrespective  of  distance,  of  24  cents  for  20  words,  ad- 
dresses not  counted,  was  not  remunerative  in  the  then 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION  29 

State  of  efficiency  of  the  telegraph.  In  this  connection 
it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  at  this  time  messages 
p    J'  u  had  to  be  retransmitted  at  intervals  of 

Companies'  200  or  300  miles;  and  that,  while  the 

Experience  maximum    distance    a    message   could 

travel  was  only  160  miles  in  Belgium,  and  200  miles  in 
Switzerland,  it  was  600  miles  in  the  United  Kingdom. 

In  1 86 1  the  telegraph  business  of  the  United  King- 
dom was  in  the  hands  of  two  companies  which  had 
been  organized  in  1846  and  1852  respectively:  the 
Electric  and  International  Telegraph  Company,  and 
the  British  and  Irish  Magnetic  Telegraph  Company. 
In  that  year,  1861,  a  new  company,  the  United  King- 
dom Electric  Telegraph  Company,  invaded  the  field 
with  a  uniform  tariff,  irrespective  of  distance,  of  24 
cents  for  20  words,  addresses  free.  The  established 
companies  had  been  charging  24  cents  for  distances  up 
to  25  miles ;  36  cents  for  distances  up  to  50  miles ;  48 
cents  for  distances  up  to  100  miles;  60  cents  for  dis- 
tances up  to  200  miles;  96  cents  for  distances  up  to 
300  miles;  and  $1.20  for  distances  up  to  400  miles.^ 

The  United  Kingdom  Company  began  operations 
in  1 86 1  with  a  trunk  line  between  London,  Birming- 


^  Journal  of  the  Statistical  Society,  March,   1881. 

The  TariflF  of  the  Electric  and  International  Co.,  for  20  words 
(addresses  not  counted  after  1854),  was  as  follows: 

In  1840,  and  for  some  years  after,  the  charge  was  2  cents  a 
mile  for  the  first  50  miles ;  i  cent  a  mile  for  the  second  50  miles ; 
and  5  cents  for  each  mile  beyond  100  miles. 

In    1850    the    maximum    charge    for    20    words   was    reduced    to 


30 


THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 


ham,  Manchester,  Liverpool  and  intermediate  and 
neighboring  towns.  Shortly  afterward  it  opened  a 
second  trunk  line  from  London  to  Northampton, 
Leicester,  Nottingham,  Sheffield,  Barnsley,  Wakefield, 
Leeds  and  Hull;  and  across  through  Bradford,  Hali- 
fax, Rochdale,  and  Huddersfield  to  Manchester  and 
Liverpool.  Subsequently  the  company  extended  its 
line  to  Edinburgh  and  Glasgow,  thus  lengthening  to 


$2.40;  early  in  1851  it  was  reduced  to  $2.04;  and  in  November, 
1851,  it  was  reduced  to  60  cents  for  100  miles,  and  $1.20  for  dis- 
tances beyond  100  miles. 


i8ss 

1863 

1864 

i86s 

Miles 

$ 

Miles 

$ 

Miles 

$ 

Miles 

$ 

50 

0.36 

25 

0.24 

50 

0.24 

100 

0.48 

50 

0.36 

ISO 

0.72 

100 

0.48 

100 

0.48 

100 

0.24 

151  and 

0.96 

200 

0.60 

200 

0.60 

100  to 

beyond 

300 

0.96 

300  and 

200 

0.36 

400  and 

1.20 

beyond 

0.72 

200  and 

0.48 

beyond 

beyond 

18SS 

186s 

$ 

$ 

To  Irelanf^-  bv  rr 

larine  ca 

ble 

1.20 

0.72  to  0.06 

In  February,  1872,  two  years  after  the  uniform  rate  of  24  cents, 
irrespective  of  distance,  had  been  put  in  force  by  the  Government, 
the  Telegraph  Department  made  a  careful  examination  of  7,000 
messages  sent  from  the  large  cities  to  all  parts  of  the  United 
Kingdom.  The  average  charge  per  message  was  found  to  be  2^ 
cents;  under  the  rates  enforced  by  the  telegraph  companies  in  1865, 
the  average  charge  would  have  been  52  cents. — Report  of  the  Post- 
master General  for  1872. 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION 


31 


upward  of  500  miles,  the  distance  over   which  mes- 
sages were  transmitted  for  24  cents. ^ 

In  July  1865,  the  Board  of  Directors  reported  as 
follows  to  the  stockholders:  "The  Directors  much 
regret  to  state  that,  notwithstanding  their  earnest  ef- 
forts to  develop  telegraphic  communication  so  as  to 
render  the  shilling  [24  cent]  rate  remunerative,  the 
company  has  been  unable  to  earn  a  dividend.  The 
system  of  the  company  consists  of  trunk  lines  almost 
exclusively  embracing  nearly  all  the  main  centres  of 
business,  telegraphically  speaking,  of  the  country. 
Seeing  that  the  company  was  working  under  the  great- 
est possible  advantages,  and  that  upward  of  four  years 
had  elapsed  since  the  formation  of  the  company  with- 
out the  payment  of  any  dividend  to  the  proprietary, 
the  directors  conceived  that  they  would  not  be  justified 
in  continuing  the  shilling  [24  cent]  system,  and 
arrangements  were  therefore  agreed  to  for  its  altera- 
tion. The  directors  waited  until  the  last  moment  be- 
fore reluctantly  adopting  this  step,  but  having  sought 
publicity  in  every  way,  having  persistently  canvassed 

*The  United  Kingdom  Telegraph  Co. 


Miles  of  line 

Miles  of  wire 

Number  of 
offices 

Number  of 
messages 

I86I 

1862 

1863 

1864 

1865 

305 

831 
1343 
1672 

1968 
2741 

5099 
8096 
9506 

16 

22 

48 

100 

125 

11,549 
133,514 
226,729 
518,651 
743,870 

32  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

in  every  department  of  business,  and  having  endeavored 
by  personal  solicitations  of  numerous  active  agents  to 
attract  trade,  they  at  last  saw  themselves  compelled  to 
agree  to  a  measure  that  was  greatly  antagonistic  to 
their  personal  wishes,  but  absolutely  essential  for  the 
well-being  of  the  company,  and  requisite,  as  they  be- 
lieve, for  the  premanent  interests  of  the  telegraphing 
community," 

In  1865,  the  United  Kingdom  Telegraph  Company 
joined  with  its  competitors,  the  Electric  and  Interna- 
tional Telegraph  Company,  and  the  British  and  Irish 
Magnetic  Telegraph  Company,  in  the  following  rates 
for  20  words,  addresses  free:  24  cents  for  distances 
up  to  100  miles;  36  cents  for  distances  between  100 
and  200  miles;  and  48  cents  for  distances  beyond  200 
miles. 

In  July,  1866,  the  directors  of  the  United  Kingdom 
Telegraph  Company  reported  that  in  the  last  half-year 
"the  company  earned  an  amount  of  profit  equal  to  6 
per  cent,  dividend  over  the  whole  of  its  share  capital." 

When  the  United  Kingdom  Company  had  entered 
the  field,  in  1861,  with  the  24  cent  rate,  the  old  estab- 
lished companies,  the  Electric  and  International  and 
the  British  and  Irish  Magnetic,  had  been  compelled  to 
adopt  the  24  cent  rate  between  all  points  reached  by 
the  United  Kingdom  Company.  In  February,  1863, 
the  directors  of  the  Electric  and  International  Company 
reported  that  the  24  cent  circuit  between  London, 
Liverpool,  Manchester  and  Birmingham  still  was  un- 


ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION  33 

remunerative.  The  company  was  losing  money  on 
every  message  transmitted,  though  the  24  cent  rate  had 
increased  business  to  such  an  extent  that  the  company 
had  been  obhged  to  add  two  wires  to  the  circuit  in 
question.  Since  the  business  done  by  means  of  the 
additional  wires  did  not  pay,  the  directors  had  charged 
the  cost  of  those  wires  to  operating  expenses,  not  to 
capital  account.  The  company  did  not  care  for  the 
business,  but  could  not  refuse  to  take  it.  In  July, 
1865,  the  directors  reported:  *'After  a  trial  of  four 
years,  the  experiment  of  a  uniform  shilling  rate  [on 
certain  circuits]  irrespective  of  distance,  has  not  justi- 
fied itself." 

The  half  yearly  reports  of  the  British  and  Irish 
Magnetic  Company  from  1862  to  1865  reported  that 
"for  any  but  very  short  distances,"  the  24  cent  tariff 
was  "utterly  unremunerative."  The  effect  of  the  rate 
was  to  absorb  in  unavoidable  additional  expenses  a 
very  large  portion  of  the  increase  in  revenue  coming 
from  the  increase  in  business. 

In  1859  the  London  District  Telegraph  Company 
was  organized  for  the  purpose  of  transmitting  tele- 
graph messages  between  points  in  Metropolitan  Lon- 
don. In  i860  the  company  had  52  stations  and  73.5 
miles  of  line;  and  it  carried  74,582  messages.  In 
1862  it  had  84  offices  and  103  miles  of  line,  and  it 
carried  243,849  messages.  In  1865  the  company 
reached  its  highest  point,  carrying  316,272  messages. 
The  company  at  that  time  had  123  miles  of  line  and 
3 


34  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

83  offices.  The  London  District  Telegraph  Company 
began  with  a  tariff  of  8  cents  for  10  words,  and  12 
cents  for  a  message  of  10  words  with  a  reply  message 
of  10  words.  It  soon  changed  its  tariff  to  12  cents  for 
15  words,  experience  having  shown  that  10  words 
was  an  insufficient  allowance.^  Subsequently  the 
company  added  porterage  charges  for  delivery  beyond 
a  certain  distance.  In  1866,  the  company  raised  its 
tariff  to  24  cents.  The  company  never  earned  operat- 
ing expenses;  and  in  November,  1867,  its  shares,  upon 
which  $25  had  been  paid  in,  fluctuated  between  $3.75 
and  $6.25.2 

Mr.  Robert  Grimston,  Chairman  pf  the  Electric  and 
International  Telegraph  Company,  in  1868  com- 
mented as  follows  upon  the  experience  of  the  London 
District  Telegraph  Company.  "A  very  strong  argu- 
ment against  the  popular  fancy  that  the  introduction 

^Journal  of  Statistical  Society,  March,  1881. 

^Miscellaneous  Statistics  for  the  United  Kingdom,  1862,  1864, 
1866  and  1868-9;  Parliamentary  Paper  No.  416,  Session  of  1867-68; 
and  Journal  of  the  Statistical  Society,  March,  1881. 

London  District  Telegraph  Co. 


i860 
1861 
1862 
1863 
1864 

i86s 
1866 
1867 
1868 


Miles  of 

Miles  of 

Number  of 

Number  of 

line 

wire 

offices 

messages 

7Z 

335 

52 

74,582 

92 

378 

78 

144,022 

103 

401 

84 

243,849 

107 

430 

81 

247,606 

IIS 

454 

80 

308,032 

123 

470 

83 

316,272 

150 

495 

80 

214,496 

150 

495 

81 

239,583 

163 

82 

ARGUMENT  FOR  NATIONALIZATION  35 

of  a  low  rate  of  charge  in  towns  and  country  districts 
would  induc*e  the  shopkeepers  and  the  lower  classes  to 
use  the  telegraph  is  furnished  by  the  example  of  the 
London  District  Telegraph  Company.  A  better  or  a 
wider  field  than  the  metropolitan  for  an  illustration  of 
this  theory  could  not  surely  be  furnished.  The  facts, 
however,  being,  that  after  several  years  of  struggling 
existence,  the  tariff  being  first  fixed  at  8  cents,  and 
then  at  12  cents,  the  company  has  never  paid  its  way.'* 


\ 


CHAPTER  III 
THE  ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE 

Early  history  of  telegraphy  in  Great  Britain,  The  adequacy 
of  private  enterprise.  Mr.  Scudamore's  loose  use  of  statistics. 
Mr.  Scudamore's  test  of  adequacy  of  facilities.  Telegraphic 
charges  and  growth  of  traffic  in  Great  Britain.  The  alleged 
wastefulness  of  competition.     The  telegraph  companies'  proposal. 

Upon  the  foregoing  evidence,  taken  from  the  ex- 
perience of  the  State  telegraphs  of  Belgium,  Switzer- 
land, and  France,  and  from  the  experience  of  the  tele- 
graph companies  of  the  United  Kingdom,  Mr.  Scuda- 
more  reached  the  conclusion  that  in  telegraphy,  in  the 
United  Kingdom,  private  enterprise  had  broken  down. 
He  stated  his  conclusion  in  these  words :  "It  is  clearly 
shown,  I  think, ....  that  the  cardinal  distinction  be- 
tween the  telegraph  system  of  the  United  Kingdom 
and  the  systems  of  Belgium  and  Switzerland  is  this : 
that  the  latter  have  been  framed  and  maintained  solely 
with  a  view  to  the  accommodation  of  the  public,  whilst 
the  former  has  been  devised  and  maintained  mainly 
with  a  view  to  the  interests  of  shareholders,  and  only 
indirectly  for  the  benefit  of  the  public."  These  words 
were  intended  to  convey,  and  they  did  convey,  the 
meaning  that  the  policy  of  laissez-faire  had  broken 

36 


ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE      37 

down.  That  policy  rests  on  the  assumption  that  in 
the  long  run,  and  upon  the  whole,  the  public  interest 
is  conserved  and  promoted  by  the  activities  of  the  in- 
dividual citizens  who  are  seeking  to  promote  their 
personal  fortunes; — by  the  activities  of  "the  mere  specu- 
lator and  dividend  seeker" — to  employ  the  phrase  that 
came  into  common  use  in  1866  to  1869,  and  ever  since, 
has  been  made  to  do  yeoman  service. 

Let  us  test  by  the  evidence — of  which  a  large  part 
is  to  be  found  tucked  away  in  the  appendices  to  Mr. 
Scudamore's  reports — this  conclusion  that  in  teleg- 
raphy, in  the  United  Kingdom,  private  enterprise  had 
broken  down,  and  the  policy  of  laissez-faire  had  been 
discredited. 

The  first  thing  to  note  in  this  connection  is,  that  in 
the  case  of  telegraphy,  as  in  the  case  of  so  many  other 
British  industries,  public  ownership  has  been  a  para- 
site. It  has  been  unwilling  to  assume  the  risk  and 
burden  of  establishing  the  industry,  and  has  contented 
itself  with  purchasing  "ready-made"  the  industry  after 
it  had  been  developed  by  private  enterprise.  When 
Mr.  Ronalds  attempted  to  interest  the  British  Govern- 
ment in  telegraphy,  he  was  told  "that  the  telegraph  was 
of  no  use  in  times  of  peace,  and  that  the  semaphore  in 
time  of  war  answered  all  the  required  purposes."^ 

In  1837,  British  individuals  and  companies  began  to 
stake  their  money  upon  the  telegraph  in  Great  Britain ; 
and  in  1854  they  even  carried  the  telegraph  industry 

"^The  Edinburgh  Review,  July,  1870. 


38  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

to  continental  Europe,  notably  to  Belgium.  In  1850 
and  1 85 1,  the  Governments  of  France,  Belgium  and 
Switzerland,  profiting  by  the  losses  suffered,  and  the 
technical  advances  made,  by  British  individuals  and 
companies,  appropriated,  so  far  as  their  countries  were 
concerned,  the  new  industry. 

The  Electric  and  International  Telegraph  Company 
was  formed  in  1846,  out  of  the  reorganization  of  prop- 
erties, that  in  1837  had  embarked  in  telegraphy  in 
England,  and  in  1845  ^^.d  carried  the  telegraph  indus- 
History  ^^^  *°  Belgium.^     At  this  time  the  use 

of  British  of  the  telegraph  was  confined  almost 

Telegraphy  exclusively  to  railway  purposes,   such 

as  train  signalling.  The  possibility  of  use  for  commer- 
cial purposes  was  so  little  appreciated  by  the  public,  that 
the  Electric  and  International  Company,  after  purchas- 
ing, in  1846,  Messrs.  Cooke  and  Wheatstone's  inven- 
tions, was  looked  upon  as  a  complete  commercial  fail- 
ure. The  shares  of  the  company  for  several  years  were 
almost  valueless;  the  chief  source  of  revenue  then  be- 
ing contracts  obtained  from  railway  companies  for  the 
construction  and  maintenance  of  railway  telegraphs. 

Between  1846  and  1851  great  improvements  were 
made  in  telegraphy,  and  the  public  gradually  learned 

^Annates  telSgraphiques,  i860,  p.  547. 

The  company  obtained  a  concession  covering  the  whole  of  Bel- 
gium. In  September,  1846,  it  opened  a  line  between  Brussels  and 
Antwerpen.  The  tariff  charged  was  low,  but  the  line  was  so  un- 
profitable that,  in  1847,  the  company  declined  to  build  from  Brus- 
sels to  Quievrain,  where  connection  was  to  be  made  with  a 
proposed  French  telegraph  line. 


ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE      39 

to  use  the  telegraph.  In  1849  the  Electric  and  Inter- 
national declared  its  first  dividend,  mainly  the  result 
of  the  contracts  with  the  railway  companies.  In 
November,  185 1,  a  cable  was  laid  between  Dover  and 
Calais;  for  the  first  time  the  prices  of  the  stock  ex- 
change securities  in  Paris  were  known  the  same  day 
within  business  hours  on  the  London  stock  exchange; 
and  the  financial  and  trading  interests  became  con- 
vinced of  the  value  of  the  telegraph.^ 

The  Electric  and  International  Company  began  in 
1846  with  a  capital,  paid  in,  of  $700,000,  which  had 
been  increased,  by  the  close  of  1868,  to  $5,849,375. 
The  company  grew  steadily,  and  in  1867  it  had  10,000 
miles  of  line,  and  49,600  miles  of  wire.  In  March, 
1856,  when  the  company  had  a  record  of  five  years  for 
dividends  ranging  from  6  to  6.5  per  cent,  on  the  capital 
paid  in,  the  stock  of  the  company  was  selling  at  80, 
which  showed  that  the  investing  public  deemed  the  re- 
turns inadequate,  considering  the  risks  attaching  to  the 
business.  In  January,  1863,  when  the  company  had  a 
record  of  three  years  as  a  7  per  cent,  company,  the 
stock  still  stood  under  par — at  99.5.  In  1864  the  com- 
pany paid  8  per  cent.,  in  1865  it  paid  9  per  cent.,  and 
in  1866  to  1868  it  paid  10  per  cent.^ 

The  British  and  Irish  Magnetic  Telegraph  Company 
was  formed  in  1857  by  amalgamation  of  the  Magnetic 
Telegraph  Company,  organized  in  1851,  and  the  British 

^Journal  of  Statistical  Society,  March,  1881. 
^Statistical  Journal,  September,  1876,  and  current  issues  of  The 
Economist  (London). 


40  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Telegraph  Company,  organized  in  1852.  In  March, 
1856,  the  Magnetic  had  a  paid  up  capital  of  $1,500,- 
000,  which  was  worth  60  cents  on  the  dollar ;  and  the 
British  Company  had  a  paid  up  capital  of  $1,170,000, 
which  was  worth  47.5  cents  on  the  dollar.  In  January, 
1864,  the  amalgamated  company  was  paying  4.5  per 
cent.,  and  its  shares  were  worth  62.5.  In  1865  the 
British  and  Irish  raised  the  dividend  to  5  per  cent.; 
in  1866  to  6  per  cent.,  and  in  1867  to  7-5  P^^  cent.  In 
1866  the  stock  sold  at  78  to  90;  and  in  1867  at  90  to 
97.  In  1867  the  company  had  4,696  miles  of  line,  and 
18,964  miles  of  wire. 

The  United  Kingdom  Telegraph  Company  was  or- 
ganized in  i860,  and  began  operations  in  1861.  In 
November,  1867,  its  shares  were  worth  from  25  cents  to 
35  cents  on  the  dollar.  At  that  time  the  company  had 
1,692  miles  of  line,  and  about  9,827  miles  of  wire. 

The  London  District  Telegraph  Company,  which 
subsequently  became  the  London  and  Provincial,  began 
business  in  i860  with  52  offices  in  Metropolitan  Lon- 
don. In  1862  it  increased  the  number  of  its  offices  to 
84 ;  and  at  the  time  of  its  sale  to  the  State,  it  had  95 
offices.  The  company  never  earned  operating  ex- 
penses. It  began  by  charging  8  cents  for  10  words; 
later  on  it  charged  12  cents  for  15  words;  and  in  1866 
it  raised  its  charge  to  24  cents. 

Very  little  new  capital  was  invested  by  the  tele- 
graph companies  after  1865,  because  of  "the  very  natu- 
ral reluctance  of  the  companies  to  extend  the  systems 


ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE      41 

under  their  control  so  long  as  the  proposal  of  the  ac- 
quisition of  those  systems  by  the  State  was  under  con- 
sideration," to  use  the  words  of  Mr.  Scudamore. 

The  foregoing  facts  show  that  private  enterprise  was 
ready  throughout  the  period  beginning  with  1838  to 
incur  considerable  risks  in  establishing  the  new  indus- 
try of  telegraphy,  and  in  giving  to  the  public  facilities 

'Adequate  Re-  ^^^  ^^^  ^^^  °^  ^^^^  industry.  Private 
suits  of  Pri-  enterprise  did  not  at  any  time  adopt 
vate  Enterprise  the  policy  of  exploiting  the  public  by 
confining  itself  to  operations  involving  little  or  no  risk, 
while  paying  well.  It  is  true  that  once  a  company  had 
reached  the  position  of  paying  5,  6,  7,  8,  or  more,  per 
cent.,  it  tried  to  maintain  that  position,  and  refrained 
from  making  extensions  at  such  a  rate  as  to  cause  a 
decrease  in  the  dividend.  But  that  fact  does  not  war- 
rant the  charge  that  the  companies  neglected  their 
duty  to  the  public.  Until  the  threat  of  purchase  by  the 
State  arrested  extensions,  and  the  dividends  rose  un- 
usually rapidly,  the  earnings  of  the  companies  were 
moderate;  and  finally,  though  the  companies  tried  to 
maintain  whatever  rate  of  dividend  had  once  been  at- 
tained, the  investing  public  never  believed  that  even 
the  Electric  and  International  would  maintain  indefi- 
nitely the  10  per  cent.  rate.  That  is  shown  by  the 
fact  that  until  the  public  began  to  speculate  on  the 
strength  of  the  prospect  of  the  State  paying  a  big  price 
for  the  property  of  the  Electric  and  International,  the 
stock  of  that  company  never  sold  for  more  than  14 


42  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

years'  purchase.^  Had  the  public  believed  that  the  lo 
per  cent,  dividend  would  be  maintained  indefinitely, 
the  stock  v^ould  have  risen  to  25  years'  purchase,  the 
price  of  the  best  railway  shares. 

In  order  to  show  that  the  people  of  the  United  King- 
dom suffered  from  a  lack  of  telegraphic  facilities,  when 
compared  with  the  people  of  Belgium  and  Switzerland, 
Mr.  Scudamore  stated  in  his  reports  of  1865  and  1866, 
Mr.  Scudamore's  that  there  were:  in  Belgium,  17.75 
Statistics  miles  of  telegraph  line  to  every    100 

square  miles;  in  Switzerland,  13.7;  and  in  the  United 
Kingdom,  11.3.  He  stated,  also,  that  there  were  in 
Belgium  6.33  telegraph  offices  to  every  100,000  people; 
in  Switzerland,  9.9;  and  in  the  United  Kingdom,  5.6. 

Mr.  Scudamore  obtained  the  figures  with  regard  to 
the  United  Kingdom  from  the  Board  of  Trade  re- 
turns.2  For  1865  to  1867,  those  returns  were  very 
incomplete;  but  in  1868  they  became  very  full.  Mr. 
Scudamore's  reports  of  1865  and  1868  were  not  or- 
dered, by  the  House  of  Commons,  to  be  printed,  until 
April,  1868,  when  the  completed  Board  of  Trade  re- 
turns were  available.  But  neither  in  the  reports  as 
laid  before  Parliament,  nor  in  the  testimony  given  be- 
fore the  Select  Committee  of  Parliament  in  1868,  did 

^Journal  of  the  Statistical  Society,  September,  1872. 

^Miscellaneous  Statistics  for  the  United  Kingdom,  1868-9,  and 
Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  416,  Session  1867-68. 

Length  of  electric  telegraphs  belonging  to  railway  companies 
and  telegraph  companies  respectively. 

In  placing  the  total  mileage  of  telegraph  line  at  16,066,  in  1865, 


ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE      43 


Mr.  Scudamore  draw  attention  to  the  fact  that  the 
statement  that  the  United  Kingdom  had  only  11.3  miles 
of  telegraph  line  to  every  100  square  miles  of  area,  and 
5.6  telegraph  offices  to  every  100,000  people,  was  based 
on  incomplete  returns. 

The  Board  of  Trade  return  for  1868  stated  that  the 
Lancashire  and  Yorkshire  Railway  Company  had  432 
miles  of  telegraph  lines  and  that  various  other  com- 
panies not  enumerated  in  1865,  had,  in  1868,  3,665 
miles  of  line.  If  it  be  assumed  that  in  the  period  from 
1865  to  1868  the  Lancashire  and  the  other  railway 
companies  not  enumerated  in  1865,  increased  their  net 
at  the  same  rate  as  did  the  three  railway  companies 
that  were  enumerated  in  1865,  namely,  11  per  cent, 

Mr.  Scudamore  excluded  the  mileage  of  the  London,  Chatham,  and 
Dover  Railway  Company. 


Railway  Companies: 

i86s 

1866 

1867 

1868 

Lancashire  &  Yorkshire 

Not 
241 
134 
324 

Not 

stated 

266 

134 

333 
stated 

430 
284 
134 
351 

4^2 

London,  Brighton  &  South  Coast... 
London,  Chatham  &  Dover 

284 
140 
351 

Other   Railway   Companies 

3,665 

Total  returned    

699 

9,306 

4,401 

1,672 

123 

Not 

733 

9,740 
4,464 
1,676 
150 
stated 

1,199 

10,007 

4,696 

1,692 

150 

4,872 

Electric  Telegraph  Companies: 
Electric  &   International 

10,007 

British  &  Irish  Magnetic   

4,696 

The  United  Kingdom 

The  London  District 

1,692 
163 

So.  Western  of  Ireland 

85 

Total  of  Companies 

15,502 

16,030 

16,545 

16,643 

Grand  Total  returned 

16,201 

16,763 

17,744 

21,515 

44  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

there  must  have  been,  in  1865,  not  less  than  3,825  miles 
of  telegraph  line  of  which  Mr.  Scudamore  took  no 
account  in  fixing  the  total  mileage  at  16,066  miles.  If 
it  be  further  assumed  that  one- third  of  the  3,825  miles 
in  question  paralleled  telegraph  lines  of  the  telegraph 
companies,  there  were  left  out  of  account  in  1865  by 
Mr.  Scudamore  2,550  miles  of  telegraph  line,  the 
equivalent  of  2.1  miles  per  100  square  miles  of  area. 
On  the  foregoing  assumptions  the  mileage  that  should 
have  been  assigned  to  the  United  Kingdom  in  1865 
was  not  1 1.3,  but  13.4. 

Considerations  similar  to  the  foregoing  ones,  when 
applied  to  Mr.  Scudamore's  statement  that  there  were, 
in  1865,  2,040  telegraph  stations,  show  that  there 
probably  were  2,680  telegraph  stations  in  1865,  a  full 
allowance  being  made  for  duplication.  The  last  named 
figure  would  have  been  equivalent  to  8.9  telegraph 
offices  for  every  100,000  people  as  against  5.6  reported 
by  Mr.  Scudamore. 

The  foregoing  corrections  probably  err  in  the  direc- 
tion of  understating  the  telegraph  facilities  existent 
in  the  United  Kingdom  in  1865.  These  corrected  re- 
sults show  that  in  the  matter  of  telegraph  line  per  100 
square  miles  of  area,  the  United  Kingdom  was  abreast 
of  Switzerland  in  1865,  though  considerably  behind 
Belgium ;  and  that,  in  the  matter  of  telegraph  offices  per 
100,000  people,  it  was  almost  abreast  of  Switzerland, 
and  considerably  in  advance  of  Belgium. 

In  this  connection  it  is  helpful  to  note  that  in  1875, 


ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE      45 

after  the  British  Government  had  spent  about  $12,500,- 
000  in  rearranging  and  extending  the  telegraph  lines, 
as  against  Mr.  Scudamore's  estimate  of  1868  that 
$1,500,000  would  suffice  for  all  rearrangements  and 
extensions,  the  number  of  miles  of  telegraph  line  per 
100  square  miles  of  area  was,  20  in  the  United  King- 
dom, and  27.4  in  Belgium.^ 

Mr.  Scudamore  submitted  several  other  arguments  in 
support  of  the  statement  that  private  enterprise  had 
failed  to  provide  the  public  with  sufficient  telegraphic 
facilities.  He  submitted  a  list  of  486  English  and 
Welsh  towns,  ranging  in  population  from  2,000  to 
Mr.  Scudamore's  ^00,000,  and  stated  in  each  case 
Standards  of  whether  or  not  the  town  was  a  telegraph 
Service  station;   and   if  it  was  one,    whether 

the  telegraph  office  was,  or  was  not,  within  the  town 
limits.  Mr.  Scudamore  summarized  the  facts  eluci- 
dated, with  the  statement  that  30  per  cent,  of  the  486 
towns  were  well  served;  that  40  per  cent,  were  indif- 
ferently served;  that  12  per  cent,  were  badly  served; 
that  18  pet  cent,  were  not  served  at  all;  and  that  the 
towns  not  served  at  all  had  an  aggregate  population 
of  more  than  500,000.^ 

*In  the  Fortnightly  Review,  December,  1875,  Mr.  W.  S.  Jevons, 
the  eminent  British  statistician  and  economist,  stated  that  the  tele- 
graph mileage  was  24,000  miles.  This  statement  is  accepted  in  the 
absence  of  any  official  information.  From  1870  to  1895  neither 
the  Reports  of  the  Postmaster  General,  nor  the  Statistical  Abstracts, 
nor  the  Board  of  Trade  Returns  stated  the  mileage  of  telegraph 
lines ;  only  the  total  mileage  of  telegraph  wires  was  published. 

^  Mr.  Scudamore's  percentage  figures,  in  some  instances,  were 
only  roughly  correct. 


46  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Mr.  Scudamore  did  not  define  his  standards  of  good 
service,  indifferent  service,  bad  service,  and  absence 
of  service;  but  examination  of  his  data  shows  that  his 
standards  were  so  rigorous  that  the  state  of  affairs  re- 
vealed in  his  summary  was  by  no  means  so  bad  as 
might  appear  at  first  sight.  Mr.  Scudamore  took  as 
the  standard  of  good  service,  the  presence  of  a  tele- 
graph office  within  the  town  limits.  He  characterized 
as  indifferent  the  service  of  98  towns  in  which  the  tele- 
graph office  was  within  one-quarter  of  a  mile  of  the 
Post  Office,  though  outside  of  the  town  limits ;  as  well 
as  the  service  of  88  towns  in  which  the  telegraph  office 
was  within  one-half  a  mile  of  the  Post  Office,  though 
outside  of  the  town  limits.  He  called  the  service  bad 
in  the  case  of  38  towns  in  which  the  telegraph  office 
was  within  three-quarters  of  a  mile  of  the  Post  Office ; 
as  well  as  in  the  case  of  22  towns  in  which  the  tele- 
graph office  was  one  mile  from  the  Post  Office.  He 
said  there  was  no  service  whenever  the  distance  of  the 
telegraph  office  from  the  Post  Office  exceeded  one 
mile.  In  this  connection  it  should  be  added  that  the 
telegraph  lines  followed  the  railway;  and  that  in  con- 
sequence of  the  prejudice  against  railway  companies 
in  the  early  days,  very  many  cities  and  towns  refused 
to  allow  the  railway  to  enter  the  city  or  town  limits. 

Mr.  Scudamore's  data  showed  that  there  had  been 
in  1865  ^^^  ^6ss  than  96  towns  in  which  the  distance 
between  the  Post  Office  and  the  nearest  telegraph  office 
exceeded  one  mile.     In  a  foot-note,  in  the  appendix, 


ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE       47 

Mr.  Scudamore  stated  that  in  1868,  not  less  than  25 
of  the  96  towns  had  been  given  a  railway  telegraph 
office;  but  no  mention  of  that  fact  did  he  make  in  the 
main  body  of  the  report,  the  only  part  of  the  document 
likely  to  be  read  even  by  the  comparatively  small  num- 
ber of  the  Members  of  Parliament  who  took  the  trouble 
to  read  the  document  at  all.  As  for  the  writers  of  the 
newspaper  press,  and  the  general  public,  they  accepted 
without  exception  the  statement  that  in  1868  not  less 
than  18  per  cent,  of  the  towns  in  question,  with  an 


Distance  of  the 
Telegraph  Station 
from  the  Post 
Office,  miles 

Number  of 
Towns 

Range  of 
Population 

Aggregate 
Population 

1.25 

7 

2,000  to  16,000 

43,000 

i.So 

7 

2,000  to  65,000 

84,000 

1.75 

2 

2,000  to     4,000 

6,000 

2.00 

6 

2,000  to   15,000 

23,000 

2.50 

3 

3,000  to     5,000 

11,000 

3-00 

6 

2,000  to     8,000 

23,000 

3.2s 

1 

4,000 

4,000 

3.50 

4 

2,000  to     4,000 

11,000 

3.7s 

1 

3,000 

3,000 

4.00 

3 

4,000 

12,000 

4-50 

2 

3,000 

6,000 

4.7s 

2 

3,000  to     5,000 

8,000 

S.oo 

7 

2,000  to  37,000 

62,000 

5.50 

I 

5,000 

5,000 

6.00 

4 

2,000  to     4,000 

12,000 

6.75 

I 

4,000 

4,000 

7.00 

5 

4,000  to     7,000 

27,000 

9.00 

2 

3,000  to     6,000 

9,000 

9.25 

I 

3,000 

3,000 

10.00 

2 

3,000  to     6,000 

9,000 

12.50 

I 

14,000 

14,000 

14.00 

I 

4,000 

4,000 

17-75 

I 

3,000 

3,000 

? 

I 

2,000 

2,000 

71 

388,000 

48 


THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS' 


aggregate  population  of  over  500,000,  had  no  tele- 
graphic service.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  statement 
applied  only  to  14.6  per  cent,  of  the  towns,  with  an 
aggregate  population  of  388,000;^  and  many  of  the 
towns  that  still  were  without  service  in  1868  would 
not  have  been  in  that  condition,  had  not  the  agitation 
for  the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs  arrested  the 
investment  of  capital  in  telegraphs  in  the  years  1865 
to  1868. 

Mr.  Scudamore  also  submitted  a  table  giving  the 
total  number  of  places  with  money  order  issuing  Post 
Offices  in  England  and  Wales,  Scotland  and  Ireland; 
and  stated  what  number  of  those  places  had  respect- 
ively perfect  telegraph  accommodation,  imperfect  tele- 
graphic accommodation,  and  no  telegraphic  accommo- 
dation.^ Mr.  Scudamore  contended  that  the  public 
interest  demanded  that  each  one  of  those  places  should 
have  at  least  one  telegraph  office,  that  office  to  be 
located  as  near  the  centre  of  population  as  was  the 
Post  Office.     H'e  submitted  no  argument  in  support 

*See  table  on  page  47. 


England 
and  Wales 

Scotland 

Ireland 

Number  of  places  having  Post 
Offices     that     issued    money 
orders           

2,056 

648 
S67 
850 

385 

91 

92 

196 

S09 
109 

Number  of  such  places  having : 
Perfect    telegraph    accommoda- 
tion                      .        

Imperfect  accommodation    .... 
No   accommodation   

33 

ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE      49 

of  that  proposition.  But  Parliament  and  the  public 
accepted  the  proposition  with  avidity,  since  Mr.  Scuda- 
more  promised  that  the  extension  required  to  give  such 
a  service  would  not  cost  more  than  $1,000,000,  about 
■fr  or  yV  of  the  total  sum  invested  by  the  several  tele- 
graph companies.  Mr.  Scudamore  also  promised  that, 
after  the  service  had  been  thus  extended,  the  total 
operating  expenses  of  the  State  telegraphs  would  be 
less  than  45  per  cent,  of  the  gross  receipts;  that  the 
State  telegraphs  would  at  least  pay  their  way,  and  that 
they  probably  would  yield  a  handsome  profit.  But 
when  Mr.  Scudamore  came  to  extend  the  State  tele- 
graphs, he  spent  upon  extensions,  not  $1,000,000,  but 
about  $8,500,000,  and  when  the  State  came  to  operate 
the  telegraphs,  the  operating  expenses  quickly  ran  up 
to  87  per  cent,  of  the  gross  receipts  in  three  years,  1874 
to  1876.  These  errors  of  Mr.  Scudamore  justify  the 
statement  that  he  made  no  case  whatever  against  the 
system  of  laissez-faire,  or  private  ownership,  on  the 
ground  of  the  extent  of  the  facilities  offered  to  the 
public,  under  the  system  of  private  ownership.  For 
obviously  it  was  one  thing  to  condemn  the  telegraph 
companies  for  not  building  certain  extensions,  those 
extensions  being  estimated  to  cost  only  $1,000,000,  and 
a  different  thing  altogether  to  condemn  the  telegraph 
companies  for  refusing  to  build  out  of  hand  exten- 
sions that  would  cost  $8,500,000  and  would  be  rela- 
tively unremunerative,  if  not  absolutely  unprofitable. 
It  remains  to  consider  whether  the  facts  as  to  the 
4 


50  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

charges  made  by  the  telegraph  companies  for  the  trans- 
mission of  messages,  and  the  facts  as  to  the  rate  of  in- 
Tariffs  and  crease  in  the  number  of  messages  trans- 

Growth  of  mitted,     supported    Mr.     Scudamore's 

■^^^^^  contention  that  the  system  of  private 

ownership  of  the  telegraphs  had  failed  to  conserve  and 
promote  the  public  interest. 

In  1 85 1,  the  Electric  and  International  Telegraph 
Company  carried  99,216  messages,  receiving  on  an 
average  $2.41  per  message.  In  1856,  the  year  in 
which  the  Scotch  Chambers  of  Commerce  began  the 
agitation  for  nationalization,  the  company  carried 
812,323  messages,  receiving  on  an  average  $0.99  per 
message.  In  1865,  the  year  in  which  the  telegraph 
companies  abolished  the  rate  of  24  cents,  irrespective 
of  distance,  that  had  been  in  force  between  the  leading 
cities,  and  the  Chambers  of  Commerce  increased  the 
agitation  for  purchase  by  the  State,  the  Electric  and 
International  carried  2,971,084  messages,  receiving 
on  an  average  $0.49  a  message.  In  the  period  from 
185 1  to  1867,  the  messages  carried  by  the  company 
increased  on  an  average  by  28.76  per  cent,  a  year;  the 
average  receipts  per  message  decreased  on  an  average 
by  7.58  per  cent,  a  year;  and  the  gross  receipts  of  the 
company  increased  on  an  average  by  13.61  per  cent,  a 
year. 

In  the  period  1855  to  1866,  the  messages  carried 
annually  by  the  British  and  Irish  Magnetic  Company 
grew  from  264,727  to  1,520,640,  an  average  annual 


ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE      51 

growth  of  17.58  per  cent.  At  the  same  time  the  av- 
erage receipts  per  message  fell  from  $0.96  in  1855,  to 
$0.48  in  1866. 

In  the  period  from  1855  to  1866,  the  number  of 
messages  carried  annually  by  all  of  the  telegraph  com- 
panies of  the  United  Kingdom  increased  from  1,017,- 
529,  to  5,781,989,  an  average  annual  increase  of  16.36 
per  cent. 

In  the  same  period,  from  1855  to  1866,  the  tele- 
grams sent  in  Switzerland  increased  on  an  average  by 
13.14  per  cent,  each  year;  those  sent  in  Belgium  in- 
creased on  an  average  by  31.45  per  cent.;  and  those 
sent  in  France  increased  on  an  average  by  25.40  per 
cent.  When  one  takes  into  consideration  that  in  Bel- 
gium, in  1867,  only  38  per  cent,  of  the  messages  trans- 
mitted related  to  stock  exchange  and  commercial  busi- 
ness, and  that  in  France  in  the  same  year  only  48  per 
cent,  of  the  messages  sent  related  to  industrial,  com- 
mercial, and  stock  exchange  transactions,  there  is 
nothing  in  the  comparison  between  the  rate  of  growth 
in  the  United  Kingdom  on  the  one  hand,  and  in  the 
countries  of  Continental  Europe  on  the  other  hand,  to 
indicate  that  the  use  of  the  telegraphs  for  the  purposes 
of  trade  and  industry  was  held  back  in  the  United 
Kingdom  by  excessive  charges  or  by  lack  of  telegraphic 
facilities.  So  far  as  the  United  Kingdom  lagged  be- 
hind, it  did  so  because  the  public  had  not  learned  to 
use  the  telegraphs  freely  for  the  transmission  of  per- 
sonal and  family  news.     And  when,  in  1875,  under 


52  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

State  owned  telegraphs,  the  pubHc  of  the  United  King- 
dom had  learned  to  use  the  telegraphs  as  freely  as  the 
public  of  Continental  Europe  used  them,  Mr.  W.  Stan- 
ley Jevons,  the  eminent  British  political  economist,  in 
the  course  of  a  review  of  the  price  paid  for  this  free 
use  of  the  telegraphs,  said:  "A  large  part  of  the  in- 
creased traffic  on  the  Government  wires  consists  of 
complimentary  messages,  or  other  trifling  matters, 
which  we  can  have  no  sufficient  motive  for  promoting. 
Men  have  been  known  to  telegraph  for  a  clean  pocket 
handkerchief" — Mr.  Jevons,  in  1866  to  1869,  had  been 
an  ardent  advocate  of  nationalizing  the  telegraphs.^ 

Mr.  Scudamore  in  1866  to  1869  caused  many  people 
to  believe  that  the  United  Kingdom  was  woefully  be- 
hind the  continental  countries  in  the  use  of  the  tele- 
graphs. He  did  so  by  publishing  a  table  which  showed 
that  in  1866  there  had  been  sent:  in  Belgium,  i  tele- 
gram to  every  37  letters  carried  by  the  Post  Office;  in 
Switzerland,  i  telegram  to  every  69  letters ;  and  in  the 
United  Kingdom,  i  telegram  to  every  121  letters. 
That  table,  however,  really  proved  nothing;  for  in 
1866,  there  were  carried :  in  Belgium,  5  letters  for 
every  inhabitant;  in  Switzerland,  10  letters;  and  in 
the  United  Kingdom,  25  letters.  Had  the  people  of 
Belgium  and  Switzerland  written  as  many  letters  pro- 
portionately as  the  people  of  the  United  Kingdom,  the 

*  The  Fortnightly  Review,  December,  1875  ;  and  Transactions  of 
the  Manchester  Statistical  Society,  1866-67. 


ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE      53 

table  prepared  by  Mr.  Scudamore  would  have  read: 
Belgium,  i  telegram  for  every  185  letters;  Switzerland, 
I  telegram  for  every  1 72  letters ;  and  the  United  King- 
dom, I  telegram  for  every  121  letters. 

Mr.  Scudamore  could,  however,  have  prepared  a 
table  showing  that  the  people  of  Switzerland  and  Bel- 
gium used  the  telegraph  more  freely  than  did  the  peo- 
ple of  the  United  Kingdom,  but  not  so  much  more 
freely  as  to  call  for  so  drastic  a  remedy  in  the  United 
Kingdom  as  the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs.  The 
table  in' question  would  have  shown  that  in  1866,  there 
was  transmitted:  in  Switzerland,  i  telegram  to  every 
3.75  inhabitants;  in  Belgium,  i  telegram  to  every  4.25 
inhabitants;  and  in  the  United  Kingdom,  i  telegram 
to  every  5.3  inhabitants.  The  table  in  question  would 
also  have  indicated  the  necessity  of  care  in  the  use  of 
the  several  kinds  of  statistics  just  put  before  the  reader. 
The  table  placed  Switzerland  in  advance  of  Belgium, 
while  the  other  sets  of  statistics  had  placed  Belgium  in 
advance  of  Switzerland. 

Mr.  Scudamore's  concluding  argument  was  that  little 
or  no  relief  from  the  evils  from  which  the  public  was 
suffering  could  be  expected  "so  long  as  the  working  of 
the  telegraphs  was  conducted  by  commercial  companies 
striving  chiefly  to  earn  a  dividend,  and  engaged  in 
wasteful  competition."  In  support  of  the  charge  of 
wasteful  competition  he  stated  "that  many  large  dis- 
tricts are  provided  with  duplicate  and  triplicate  lines, 


54  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

worked  by  different  companies,  but  taking  much  the 
same  course  and  serving  precisely  the  same  places ;  and 
Alleged  Waste-  ^^^*  these  duplicate  or  triplicate  lines 
fulness  of  Com-  and  duplicate  or  triplicate  offices  only 
petition  divide  the  business  without  materially 

increasing  the  accommodation  of  the  districts  or  towns 
which  they  serve."  But  when  Mr.  Scudamore  sought 
to  substantiate  this  charge  of  waste  arising  out  of  com- 
petition, he  could  do  no  more  than  state  that  not  less 
than  2,000  miles  of  line  in  a  total  of  16,066  miles  were 
redundant,  and  that  perhaps  300  to  350  offices  in  a  total 
of  2,040  offices  were  redundant. 

The  evidence  presented  by  Mr.  Scudamore  failed  to 
reveal  a  situation  that  called  for  so  drastic  a  remedy 
as  the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs.  It  revealed 
no  evils  or  shortcomings  that  it  was  unreasonable  to 
expect  would  be  sufficiently  mitigated,  if  not  entirely 
removed,  by  the  measures  proposed  by  the  telegraph 
companies. 

Mr.  Robert  Grimston,  Chairman  of  the  Electric  and 
International  Telegraph  Company,  stated  that  the  tele- 
graph companies  long  since  would  have  asked  Parlia- 
ment to  permit  them  to  consolidate,  had  there  been  the 
least  likelihood  of  Parliament  granting  the  request. 
Consolidation  would  have  made  the  resulting  amalga- 
mated company  so  strong  that  the  company  would  have 
been  justified  in  adopting  a  bolder  policy  in  the  matter 


ALLEGED  BREAK-DOWN  OF  LAISSEZ-FAIRE       55 

of  extending  the  telegraph  Hnes  to  places  remote  from 
the  railways.  No  single  company  could  afford  to  as- 
sume too  large  a  burden  of  lines  that  would  begin  as 
*'suckers"  rather  than  ^'feeders."  A  company  with  a 
large  burden  of  that  kind  would  be  in  a  precarious  posi- 
tion, because  any  of  the  other  existing  companies,  or 
some  new  company,  might  take  advantage  of  the  situa- 
tion and  cut  heavily  into  that  part  of  the  company's 
business  that  was  carried  on  between  the  large  cities 
and  was  bearing  the  burden  of  the  non-paying  exten- 
sions. But  if  the  existing  companies  were  to  consoli- 
date, the  resulting  company  would  become  so  strong 
that  it  need  not  fear  such  competition  from  any  com- 
pany newly  to  be  organized.  That  there  was  much 
strength  in  that  argument  appears  from  the  fact  that, 
in  1869,  Mr.  Scudamore  as  well  as  the  Government 
adopted  it  in  support  of  the  request  that  the  State  be 
given  the  monopoly  of  the  business  of  transmitting 
messages  by  electricity.  Mr.  Scudamore  argued  that 
since  the  State  was  going  to  assume  the  burden  of 
building  and  operating  a  large  number  of  unprofitable, 
or  relatively  unprofitable,  extensions,  it  should  not  be 
exposed  to  the  possibility  of  competition  from  com- 
panies organized  for  the  purpose  of  tapping  the  profit- 
able traffic  between  the  large  cities,  "the  very  cream  of 
the  business."  Mr.  Scudamore  added  that  he  had  been 
told  that  a  company  was  on  the  verge  of  being  organ- 
ized for  the  purpose  of  competing  for  the  business  be- 
tween the  large  towns  as  soon  as  the  properties  of  the 


56  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

existing  companies  should  have  been  transferred  to  the 
State.i 

The  telegraph  companies  proposed  to  give  the  public 
substantial  safeguards  against  the  possibility  of  being 
exploited  by  the  proposed  amalgamated  company. 
They  proposed  that  Parliament  should  fix  maximum 
The  Companies'  charges  for  the  transmission  of  mes- 
Proposal  sages,  in  conjunction  with  a  limit  on 

dividends  that  might  be  exceeded  only  on  condition 
that  the  existing  charges  on  messages  be  reduced  by  a 
stated  amount  every  time  that  the  dividend  be  raised  a 
stated  amount  beyond  the  limit  fixed.  The  companies 
proposed  also  that  shares  to  be  issued  in  the  future 
should  be  sold  at  public  auction,  and  that  any  premiums 
realized  from  such  sales  should  be  invested  in  the  plant 
with  the  condition  that  they  should  not  be  entitled  to 
any  dividend.  Provisions  such  as  these,  at  the  time, 
were  in  force  in  the  case  of  certain  gas  companies  and 
water  companies.  They  have  for  years  past  been  in- 
corporated in  all  gas  company  charters ;  and  they  have 
worked  well.  There  was  no  reason,  in  1866  to  1869, 
why  the  proposals  of  the  telegraph  companies  should 
not  be  accepted ;  that  is,  no  reason  from  the  view-point 
of  the  man  who  hesitated  to  exchange  the  evils  and 
shortcomings  incident  to  private  ownership  for  the 
evils  and  shortcomings  incident  to  public  ownership. 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Telegraphic  Bill,  1869  ; 
q.  321  to  329.  In  1868,  Mr.  Scudamore  and  the  Government  had 
said  that  the  State  ought  not  to  be  given  the  monopoly  of  the  tele- 
graph business.  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the 
Telegraphs  Bill,  1868;  q.  124  and  following,  319  and  320,  and  2,464 
and  following. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS 

Upon  inadequate  consideration  the  Disraeli  Ministry  estimated 
at  $15,000,000  to  $20,000,000  the  cost  of  nationalization.  Political 
expediency  responsible  for  Government's  inadequate  investigation. 
The  Government  raises  its  estimate  to  $30,000,000;  adding  that 
it  could  afford  to  pay  $40,000,000  to  $50,000,000.  Mr.  Goschen, 
M.  P.,  and  Mr.  Leeman,  M.  P.,  warn  the  House  of  Commons 
against  the  Government's  estimates,  which  had  been  prepared  by 
Mr.  Scudamore.  The  Gladstone  Ministry,  relying  on  Mr.  Scuda- 
more,  estimates  at  $3,500,000  the  "reversionary  rights"  of  the  rail- 
way companies,  for  which  rights  the  State  ultimately  paid  $10,- 
000,000  to  $11,000,000. 

On  April  i,  1868,  the  Disraeli  Government  brought 
into  Parliament  a  ''Bill  to  enable  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral to  acquire,  work,  and  maintain  Electric  Tele- 
graphs in  the  United  Kingdom."^  At  this  time  the 
Government  still  was  ignorant  of  the  precise  relations 
existing  between  the  telegraph  companies  and  the  rail- 
ways; and  it  did  not  foresee  that  the  purchase  of  the 
assets  of  the  telegraph  companies  would  lead  to  the 
purchase  of  the  reversionary  rights  of  the  railways  in 
the  telegraphs,  the  telegraphs  having  been,  for  the 
most  part,  erected  on  the  lands  of  the  railways,  under 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  i,  1868,  p.  678,  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer. 


57 


rr  "HE 
UNSVt^ttSlTY 


OF 


58  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

leases  of  way-leaves  that  still  had  to  run,  on  an  aver- 
age, 23.7  years.  At  this  time,  therefore,  the  Govern- 
ment contemplated  only  the  purchase  of  the  Electric 
and  International  Company,  the  British  and  Irish 
Company,  the  United  Kingdom  Company,  and  the 
London  and  Provincial,  the  successor  of  the  London 
District  Telegraph  Company. 

In  the  course  of  the  debate  upon  the  order  for  the 
Second  Reading  of  the  Bill,  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  Mr.  G.  W.  Hunt,  said  that  "if  the  House 
would  excuse  him,  he  would  rather  not  enter  fully  into 
details  with  respect  to  the  purchase  at  present.  But 
he  would  say  that,   speaking  roughly,  it  would  take 

„  ,  „  .  something-  near  $20,000,000,  or,  at  all 
Purchase  Price  ° 

estimated  at  events,  between  $15,000,000  and  $20,- 
$15,000,000  to        000,000  for  the  purchase  and  the  nec- 

'     '  essary   extensions   of  the  lines."     He 

added  that  if  the  purchase  should  be  made,  the  tele- 
graphs would  yield  a  net  revenue  of  $1,050,000  a  year; 
and  that  sum  would  suffice  to  pay  the  interest  on  the 
debt  to  be  contracted,  and  to  clear  off  that  debt  in 
twenty-nine  years.^ 

Parliament  was  to  be  prorogued  in  August;  and  a 
General  Election  was  to  follow  prorogation.  Tlie 
Government  naturally  was  anxious  to  avoid  having  to 
go  into  the  General  Election  without  having  achieved 
the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs;  particularly, 
since  the  opposition  party  also  had  committed  itself  to 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  9,  1868,  p.  1,305. 


THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS     59 

State  purchase.  Then  again,  the  Government  beHeved 
that  the  value  of  the  telegraphs  was  increasing  so 
Politics  forces  rapidly  that  the  State  would  lose  money 
Government's  by  any  postponement  of  the  act  of  pur- 
^^^^  chase.     For  these  reasons  the  Govern- 

ment entered  into  negotiations  with  the  various  inter- 
ests that  evinced  a  disposition  to  oppose  in  Parlia- 
ment the  Government's  Bill,  until  finally  all  opposition 
was  removed. 

The  Bill,  as  introduced,  proposed  that  the  State  pay 
the  four  telegraph  companies  enumerated,  the  money 
actually  invested  by  them — about  $11,500,000 — to- 
gether with  an  allowance  for  the  prospective  increase 
of  the  earnings  of  the  companies,  and  an  additional 
allowance  for  compulsory  sale.  The  last  two  items 
were  to  be  fixed  by  an  arbitrator  who  was  to  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  Board  of  Trade.  The  companies  flatly 
rejected  this  offer,  pointing,  by  way  of  precedent,  to 
the  Act  of  1844,  which  fixed  the  terms  to  be  given  to 
the  railways,  should  the  State  at  any  time  resolve  upon 
the  compulsory  purchase  of  the  railways.  The  Act  in 
question  prescribed :  "twenty-five  years'  purchase  of 
the  average  annual  divisible  profits  for  three  years  be- 
fore such  purchase,  provided  these  profits  shall  equal 
or  exceed  10  per  cent,  on  the  capital;  and,  if  not,  the 
railway  company  shall  be  at  liberty  to  claim  any  further 
sum  for  anticipated  profits,  to  be  fixed  by  arbitration." 

The  Government  next  offered  the  companies  the 
highest  market  price  reached  by  the  stock  of  the  com- 


60  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

panics  on  the  London  Stock  Exchang-e  up  to  May  28, 
1868,  plus  an  allowance  for  prospective  profits,  to  be 
fixed  by  arbitration.  The  companies  rejected  that 
offer,  but  accepted  the  next  one,  namely,  twenty  years' 
purchase  of  the  profits  of  the  year  that  was  to  end  with 
June  30,  1868.^  Mr.  W.  H.  Smith,  one  of  the  most 
highly  esteemed  Members  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
who  was  himself  a  director  in  the  Electric  and  Inter- 
national, subsequently  spoke  as  follows  of  these  nego- 
tiations: "In  1868  the  telegraph  companies  were  by 
no  means  desirous  to  part  with  their  property,  but  the 
question  whether  the  Government  should  be  in  posses- 
sion of  the  telegraphs  having  been  forced  on  their  con- 
sideration, the  three  principal  companies  very  reluc- 
tantly came  to  an  arrangement  with  the  Government 
of  the  day.  He  did  not  wish  to  express  any  opinion 
on  the  bargain  which  had  been  made,  and  would  only 
say  for  himself  and  those  with  whom  he  was  asso- 
ciated, that  they  very  deeply  regretted  to  be  obliged  to 
part  with  property  which  had  been  profitable,  and 
which  they  had  great  pleasure  in  managing.  "^  Mr. 
Smith  added  that  the  net  earnings  of  the  Electric  and 
International  had  increased  from  $336,815  in  1862, 
to  $859,215  in  1868;  and  that  the  average  annual  in- 
crease per  cent,  had  been  17.2  per  cent. 

The  state  of  the  public  mind  at  the  time  when  the 

*  special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868.  Mr.  Scudamore:  q.  3.477  and  following,  3>352  to 
3,364,  172,  and  3,379  to  3,386. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  26,  1869,  p.  755. 


THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS     61 

Government  intrcduced  its  Bill,  was  indicated  in  the 
issue  of  April  ii,  1868,  of  The  Economist,  the  leading 
financial  newspaper  of  Great  Britain.  Said  the  jour- 
nal in  question:  "Even  if  the  companies  resist,  they 
will  not  be  very  powerful  opponents — firstly,  because 
the  leaders  of  both  parties  have  already  sanctioned  the 
scheme;  and,  secondly,  because  the  companies  are  ex- 
ceptionally unpopular.  There  is,  probably,  no  inter- 
est in  the  Kingdom  which  is  so  cordially  disliked  by 
the  press,  which,  when  united,  is  stronger  than  any 
interest,  and  which  has  suffered  for  years  under  the 
shortcomings  of  the  private  companies.  The  real  dis- 
cussion in  Parliament,  should  there  be  any,  will  turn 
upon  a  very  different  point,  and  it  will  be  not  a  little 
interesting  to  observe  how  far  the  current  of  opinion 
on  the  subject  of  State  interference  with  private  en- 
terprise, has  really  ebbed  within  the  last  few  years. 
Twelve  or  fourteen  years  ago  it  would  have  been  use- 
less for  any  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  to  propose 
such  an  operation It  was  [at  that  time]  be- 
lieved on  all  sides  that  State  interference  was  wrong, 
because  it  shut  out  the  private  speculators  from  the 
natural  reward  of  their  energy  and  labor." 

Before  the  Select  Committee  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons to  which  was  referred  the  Government's  Bill, 
Mr.  Scudamore  argued  that  if  Parliament  could  not 
make  a  reasonable  bargain  with  the  telegraph  com- 
panies, it  could  authorize  the  Post  Office  to  build  a 
system  of  telegraphs.     But  that  measure  ought  to  be 


62  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

adopted  only  as  a  last  resource.  It  was  of  paramount 
importance  to  avoid  shaking  the  confidence  of  the  in- 
vestors that  private  enterprise  would  be  allowed  to  reap 
the  full  benefits  of  its  enterprise,  and  that  it  would  be 
exposed  to  nothing  more  than  the  ordinary  vicissitudes 
of  trade.  That  the  possibility  of  competition  by  the 
State,  by  means  of  money  taken  from  the  people  by 
taxation,  never  had  been  included  within  the  ordinary 
vicissitudes  of  trade.  Coming  to  the  question  of  pay- 
ing twenty  years'  purchase  of  the  profits  of  the  year 
1 867- 1 868,  Mr.  Scudamore  said:  "The  telegraphs  are 
so  much  more  valuable  a  property  than  we  originally 
believed,  that  if  you  do  not  buy  them  this  year,  you 
unquestionably  will  have  to  pay  $2,500,000  more  for 

them     next     year Their      [average]      annual 

growth  of  profit  is  certainly  not  less  than  ten  per  cent, 
at  present.  If  you  wait  till  next  year  and  only  give 
them  nineteen  years'  purchase,  you  will  give  them  more 
than  you  will  now  give.  If  you  wait  two  years,  and 
give  them  eighteen  years'  purchase,  you  will  still  give 
them  more  than  you  will  now  give,  assuming  the  an- 
nual growth  of  profit  to  be  the  same.  If  you  wait  four 
years,  and  give  them  sixteen  years'  purchase,  you  will 
again  give  them  more,  and  in  addition  you  will  have 
lost  the  benefit  accruing  in  the  four  years,  which  would 
have  gone  into  their  pockets  instead  of  coming  into 
the  pockets  of  the  nation."^ 

*  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868;  q.  3,366  and  following,  3,484  and  following,  and 
2,204  to  2,226. 


THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS     63 

In  the  House  of  Commons,  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  Mr.  G.  W.  Hunt,  said :  ''The  terms  agreed 
upon,  although  very  liberal,  were  not  more  liberal  than 
they  should  be  under  the  circumstances,  and  did  not 
offer  more  than  an  arbitrator  would  have  given.  The 
companies  had  agreed  to  sell  at  twenty  years'  purchase 
of  present  net  profits,  although  those  profits  were  in- 
creasing at  the  rate  of  lo  per  cent,  a  year.  He  was 
satisfied  the  more  the  House  looked  into  the  matter, 
the  more  they  would  be  satisfied  with  the  bargain 
made."^  The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  continued 
with  the  statement  that  Mr.  Scudamore  estimated  that 
the  Postmaster  General  would  obtain  from  the  tele- 
graphs a  net  revenue  of  $1,015,000  at  the  minimum, 
and  $1,790,000  at  the  maximum.  The  mean  of  those 
estimates  was  $1,402,500,  which  sum  would  pay  the 
interest  and  sinking  fund  payments — 3.5  per  cent,  in 
all — on  $40,000,000.  The  Government,  therefore, 
could  afford  to  pay  $40,000,000  for  the  telegraphs. 
Indeed,  on  the  basis  of  the  maximum  estimate  of  net 
revenue,  it  could  pay  $50,000,000.  But  Mr.  Scuda- 
more confidently  fixed  at  $30,000,000  at  the  maxi- 

Purchase  price  "^^"^^  ^^^  P^i^^  that  the  Government 
estimated  at  would  have  to  pay.  Mr.  Scudamore's 
$30,000,000  estimates  of  net  revenue  "would  stand 

any  amount  of  examination  by  the  House,  as  they  had 
stood  very  careful  scrutiny  by  the  Select  Committee, 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  21,  1868,  p.  1,557  and 
following. 


64  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

and  for  the  Government  to  carry  out  the  scheme  would 
not  only  prove  safe  but  profitable." 

By  this  time  the  Government  had  learned  that  it 
would  be  necessary  to  purchase  the  reversionary  rights 
of  the  railway  companies  in  the  business  of  the  tele- 
graph companies.  The  Government  had  agreed  with 
the  railway  companies  upon  the  terms  under  which  it 
was  to  be  left  to  arbitration  how  much  should  be  paid 
for  those  reversionary  rights.  The  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer  stated  that  he  was  unwilling  to  divulge  the 
Government's  estimates  of  what  sums  would  be 
awarded  under  the  arbitration;  for,  if  he  did  divulge 
them,  they  might  be  used  against  the  Government  be- 
fore the  arbitrators.  "But  Mr.  Scudamore,  whose 
ability  with  regard  not  only  to  this  matter,  but  also  to 
other  matters,  had  been  of  great  service  to  the  Govern- 
ment, had  given  considerable  attention  to  the  matter, 
and  Mr.  Scudamore  believed  that  $30,000,000  would 
be  the  outside  figure"  to  be  paid  to  the  telegraph  com- 
panies and  the  railway  companies.  The  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  added  that  Mr.  Scudamore's  "cal- 
culations had  been  submitted  to  and  approved  by  Mr. 
Foster,  the  principal  finance  officer  of  the  Treasury." 

In  passing,  it  may  be  stated  that  Mr.  Foster  had 
stated  before  the  Select  Committee  of  the  House  of 
Commons  that  he  had  given  only  "two  or  three  days" 
to  the  consideration  of  the  extremely  difficult  question 
of  the  value  that  the  arbitrators  would  be  likely  to  put 
upon  the  railway  companies'  reversionary  rights.^ 

*  special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868;  Mr.  Foster,  q.  2,857,  ^i  passim. 


THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS     65 

Mr.  Goschen,  of  the  banking  firm  of  Friihling  and 
Goschen,  who  had  been  a  member  of  the  Select  Com- 
mittee, and  had  taken  an  active  part  in  its  proceedings, 
repHed  that  "the  inquiry  [by  the  committee]  had  been 
carried  on  under  great  disadvantages.     An  opposition, 

organized  by  private  interests  [the  tele- 
Parliament 
warned  against     S'^'^ph  companies  and  the  railway  com- 

Government's        panics],    had    been    changed    into    an 
s  ima  es  organization  of  warm  supporters  of  the 

Bill  pending  the  inquiry.  Before  the  Committee  there 
appeared  Counsel  representing  the  promoters  [t.  e.,  the 
Government],  and,  at  first,  counsel  representing  the 
original  opposition  to  the  Bill  [i.  e.  the  telegraph  and 
railway  companies] ;  but  in  consequence  of  the  change 
in  the  views  of  the  opposition,  who  during  the  pro- 
ceedings became  friendly  to  the  Bill,  there  was  no 
counsel  present  to  cross-examine  the  witnesses.  Con- 
sequently, in  the  interests  of  the  public,  and  in  order 
that  all  the  facts  might  be  brought  to  light,  members 
of  the  committee  [chiefly  Mr.  Goschen  and  Mr.  Lee- 
man]  had  to  discharge  the  duty  of  cross-examining 
the  witnesses.  The  same  causes  led  to  the  result  that 
the  witnesses  produced  were  all  on  one  side."  .  .  .  } 

*  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868. 

Mr.  Leeman  cross-questions  Mr.  Scudamore. 

2,331.  "Did  you  agree  with  the  Telegraph  Compa,nies  till  after 
this  Bill  was  sent  to  the  Select  Committee?" — "No." 

2,Z32.  "At  the  time  this  Bill  was  sent  to  this  Committee  you  had 
petitions  against  you,  had  you  not,  from  25  or  30  different  in- 
terests ?" — "Yes  ;  quite  that." 

2,333.  "Since  that  time,  have  you,  with  the  exception  of  the 
interest  which   Mr.  Merewether  now  represents   [Universal  Private 

5 


66  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Mr.  Goschen  emphasized  the  fact  that  upon  the  ex- 
piring of  the  telegraph  companies'  leases  of  rights  of 
way  over  the  railways,  the  reversionary  rights  of  the 
railways  would  come  into  play,  and  that  the  Govern- 
ment, after  having  paid  twenty  years'  purchase  to  the 
telegraph  companies,  "would  probably  have  to  pay  half 
as  much  again  to  the  railways."  "The  railways  had 
felt  the  strength  of  their  position  so  much,  that  they 
had  pointed  out  to  the  committee  that  they  would  not 
only  be  entitled  to  an  increase  in  the  rate  which  they 
now  received  [as  rent  from  the  telegraph  companies] 
as  soon  as  the  leases  expired,  but  they  would  also  be 
entitled  to  an   indemnification    [from  the   State]    for 

Telegraph  Co.],  bought  up  every  interest,  or  contracted  to  buy  up 
every  interest,  which  was  represented  by  those  petitioners?" — "Yes, 
subject  to  arbitration  and  the  approval  o£  the  committee." 

2.334.  "They  had  largely,  upon  the  face  of  their  petitions,  con- 
troverted the  views  you  have  been  expressing  to  this  Committee?" 
— "They  had  endeavored  to  do  so," 

2.335.  "They  had  in  fact?" — "They  had  endeavored  to  put  for- 
ward a  case  against  me.     I  do  not  say  it  was  a  good  case." 

2.336.  "In  direct  opposition  to  the  information  you  have  been 
supplying  to  the  Committee?" — "Undoubtedly." 

2.337.  "The  Electric  and  International  Telegraph  Company  was 
the  company  most  largely  interested,  was  it  not?" — "Yes." 

2.338.  "That  company  had  put  forth  its  views  controverting  in 
detail  what  you  have  been  stating  to  the  Committee  in  the  course 
of  your  examination?" — "Attempting  to  controvert  it." 

2.339.  "By  your  arrangements,  since  the  time  at  which  this  Bill 
was  submitted  to  this  Select  Committee  to  inquire  into,  you  have  in 
truth  shut  the  mouths  of  all  these  parties?" — "They  are  perfectly 
welcome  to  speak ;  I  am  not  shutting  their  mouths." 

2.340.  "Do  you  propose  to  call  them?" — "No,  but  they  are  here 
to  be  called." 

2.341.  "You  do  not  propose  to  call  them.  This  is  the  fact,  is  it 
not,  that  this  Bill  was  sent  to  the  Select  Committee,  with  special 
instructions  to  make  inquiries  into  various  matters  raised  by  peti- 
tions from  25  to  30  different  interests,  and  you  have,  since  that  time, 
subsidized  every  interest  that  could  give  any  information  to  this 
Committee;  is  not  that  the  fact?"— "Not  qmte." 


I 


THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS     67 

the  loss  they  would  sustain  in  not  being  allowed  [in 
consequence  of  the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs] 
to  put  the  screw  on  the  telegraph  companies."  Mr. 
Goschen  said  "he  felt  very  strongly  on  this  point  be- 
cause he  was  convinced  that  it  was  impossible  to  find 
an  instance  of  any  private  enterprise  which,  while  it 
returned  a  profit  of  15  per  cent,  to  its  shareholders, 
enjoyed  a  monopoly  for  any  great  length  of  time."  If 
the  Government  purchased  the  assets  of  the  telegraph 
companies,  the  railway  companies  would  succeed  in 
compelling  the  State  to  share  with  them  the  great 
profits  to  be  obtained  from  the  business  of  telegraphy. 
They  would  do  so  by  compelling  the  Government  to 
pay  a  big  sum  for  their  reversionary  rights  in  the  tele- 
graph companies,  as  the  price  for  abstaining  from  build- 
ing up  a  telegraph  business  of  their  own,  upon  the 
expiry  of  the  telegraph  companies'  leases.  No  busi- 
ness that  yielded  a  return  of  15  per  cent.  *  could  be 
worth  twenty  years'  purchase,  for  such  returns  were 
very  insecure,  because  of  the  certainty  that  competition 
would  arise  from  persons  who  would  be  content  with 
ten  per  cent.,  or  less.^ 

Mr.  Leeman,  who  had  sat  on  the  Select  Committee, 
and  had,  with  Mr.  Goschen,  done  all  of  the  cross- 
examining  directed  to  bring  out  the  points  that  told 
against  the  Government's  proposal,  followed  Mr. 
Goschen  in  the  debate.     He  began  by  stating  that  he 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  21,  1868,  p.  1,568  and 
following. 


68  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Spoke  with  "twenty  years'  experience  as  a  railway 
man;"  and  he  directed  his  argument  especially  against 
the  terms  of  the  agreements  made  by  the  Government 
to  purchase  the  reversionary  rights  of  the  railways  in 
the  telegraph  companies'  businesses.  "Mr.  Scuda- 
more,  who  was  what  he  had  already  been  described  to 
be — a  most  able  man — had  not  known,  up  to  the  time 
of  the  second  reading  of  the  Bill  [June  8,  1868],  what 
were  the  existing  arrangements  between  the  telegraph 
companies  and  the  railway  companies;  and,  subse- 
quently, while  still  without  the  requisite  knowledge 
on  that  point,^  he  went  and  agreed  on  the  part  of  the 
Government  to  buy  the  interest  of  the  telegraph  com- 
panies at  20  years'  purchase  of  their  profits.  In  addi- 
tion it  was  to  be  remembered  that  the  railway  com- 
panies had  reversionary  interests  which  would  come 
into  operation  after  comparatively  short  time  for  which 
their  arrangements  with  the  telegraph  companies  were 
to  continue.  In  July,  1866,  Mr.  Scudamore  estimated 
the  necessary  outlay  on  the  part  of  the  Government  at 
$12,000,000.  In  February,  1868,  another  officer  of 
the  Government  raised  the  estimate  to  $15,000,000; 
but  it  was  not  until  the  Bill  came  before  the  committee 


*  special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868. 

Mr.  Leeman  examines  Mr.  Scudamore. 

Question  2,330.  "When  the  Bill  was  read  a  second  time  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  had  you  knowledge  of  the  contents  of  the  terms 
of  the  agreement  betv/een  the  Telegraph  Companies  and  the  Railway 
Companies,  which  enabled  you  to  form  any  judgment  financially  as 
to  what  you  might  ultimately  have  to  pay  in  respect  of  the  Railway 
Companies?" — "No,  I  had  not." 


THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS     69 

[July,  1868],  that  Mr.  Scudamore  said  that  $30,000,- 

000    would    be    required He    [Mr.    Leeman] 

undertook  to  say  that  Mr.  Scudamore  was  as  wide  of 
the  mark  in  his  estimate  of  $30,000,000,  as  he  had 
been  in  his  estimate  of  $12,000,000.  At  the  expira- 
tion of  their  agreements  with  the  telegraph  companies, 
several  [all]  of  the  railway  companies  would  have  it 
in  their  power  to  compete  with  the  Post  Office  in  the 
transmission  of  telegraphic  messages.  No  doubt  this 
fact  would  be  brought  under  the  notice  of  the  arbitra- 
tors when  the  value  of  their  reversion  was  being  con- 
sidered, and  at  what  price  would  the  arbitrators  value 
this  reversionary  power  of  competition?  Had  Mr. 
Scudamore  made  any  estimate  on  the  subject?  Owing 
to  the  position  in  which  Mr.  Scudamore  had  placed  the 
Government,  the  railway  companies  had  demanded  and 
had  been  promised  terms  in  respect  of  their  reversions, 
which  he,  as  a  railway  man,  now  said  it  was  the  duty 
of  any  Government  to  have  resisted.'^  .  .  .  } 

For  the  better  understanding  of  this  question  of  re- 
versions, it  must  be  stated  that  the  telegraph  compa- 
nies, for  the  most  part,  had  erected  their  poles  and  wires 

„  .,        ^  on  the  permanent  way  of  the  railway 

Railway  Com- 
panies' Re-  companies,  under  leases  of  way-leaves, 

versionary  which,  in  1868,  still  had  23.7  years  to 

^^   "^  run,  on  the  average.^     As  the  leases 

should  expire,  the  railway  companies  would  have  an 

opportunity  to  try  to  obtain  better  terms,  or  to  order 

'^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  21,  1868,  p.  1,578  and 
following. 

^Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 


70  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  companies  to  remove  their  plant,  and  then  to  erect 
their  own  plant,  and  themselves  engage  in  the  tele- 
graph business.  But  the  railway  companies  were 
handicapped  by  the  fact  that  the  leases  did  not  expire 
together,  and  that  it  would  be  difficult  to  build  up  a 
new  telegraph  system  piecemeal  out  of  the  parts  of  line 
that  would  become  free  in  the  next  three  years  to 
twenty-nine  years.  There  was,  therefore,  much  room 
for  difference  of  opinion  on  the  question  how  far  the 
railway  companies  would  be  able  "to  put  the  screw" 
on  the  telegraph  companies  upon  the  successive  expira- 
tions of  leases.  The  Stock  Exchange  doubtless  took  the 
contingency  into  consideration,  that  being  one  reason 
why  the  Electric  and  International  shares  did  not  rise 
above  fourteen  years'  purchase  of  the  annual  dividends. 
Mr.  Scudamore,  before  the  Select  Committee,  expressed 
the  opinion  that  the  railway  companies  could  force  the 
telegraph  companies  "to  give  them  somewhat  better 
terms ;  that  would  be  the  extreme  result  of  any  negotia- 
tions between  the  telegraph  companies  and  the  railway 
companies."  To  Mr.  Foster,  principal  officer  of  the 
Finance  Division  of  the  Treasury,  whom  the  Govern- 
ment called  to  support  Mr.  Scudamore's  evidence,  Mr. 
Leeman  put  the  question :  "Looking  at  it  as  a  financial 


graphs  Bill,  1868 ;  Appendix,  No.  7- 

Leases  to  expire  in :  Number  of  miles  of  telegraph  line 

3  to     6  years  1,280 

7    "  10      "  4.046 

II    "  20      "  3,211 

20    "  99      "  4.927 

Average  tmexpired  length  of  all  leases :  23.67  years. 


THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS     71 

question,  do  you  suppose  all  the  railways  in  the  coun- 
try, having  power  to  work  their  telegraphs  at  the  end 
of  ten  years,  but  for  this  Bill,  will  not  put  in  a  claim 
for  a  very  large  sum  in  respect  of  that  reversion?" 
The  witness  replied :  "I  do  not  think  it  would  be  of 
very  great  value  in  the  first  place,  and  in  the  next  place 
it  would  be  a  value  deferred  for  ten  years,  which  would 
very  much  diminish  it."  To  the  further  query :  "You 
do  not  take  the  view  that  we  shall  have  to  pay  the  rail- 
way companies  and  also  the  telegraph  companies  for 
the  same  thing,"  he  replied  in  the  negative.^ 

Shortly  after  the  Government's  Bill  had  been  re- 
ferred to  the  Select  Committee,  the  Government  made 
the  railway  companies  this  proposition,  which  was 
accepted.  The  Government  was  to  acquire  perpetual 
and  exclusive  way-leaves  for  telegraph  lines  over 
the  railways,  and  the  price  to  be  paid  therefor  was  to 
be  left  to  arbitration.  The  railway  companies  were 
to  have  the  choice  of  presenting  their  claims  either 
under  the  head  of  payment  for  the  cession  of  perpetual 
and  exclusive  way-leaves  to  the  Government ;  or,  under 
the  head  of  compensation  for  the  loss  of  right  to  grant 
way-leaves  to  any  one  other  than  the  Government,  as 
well  as  for  the  loss  of  .right  themselves  to  transmit 
messages,  except  on  their  own  railway  business.  The 
Government  was  of  the  opinion  that  the  sums  to  be 
paid  to  the  railways  under  this  agreement  would  not 

*  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  i868;  q.  2,980,  3,023,  and  1,132. 


72 


THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 


be  large  enough  to  raise  above  $30,ooo,cx)o,  the  total 
sum  to  be  paid  to  the  telegraph  companies  and  the  rail- 
ways. 

Parliament  enacted  the  Bill  of  1868  authorizing  the 
Government  to  purchase  the  property  of  the  telegraph 
companies  and  the  rights  of  the  railways;  but  it  pro- 
vided that  the  resulting  Act  of  1868  should  not  take 
effect,  unless,  in  the  Session  of  1869,  Parliament 
should  put  at  the  disposal  of  the  Postmaster  General 
such  monies  as  were  required  to  carry  out  the  provi- 
sions of  the  Act  of  1868. 

The  Government  immediately  appointed  a  com- 
mittee to  ascertain  the  profits  earned  by  the  telegraph 
companies  in  the  year  that  had  ended  with  June,  1868. 
The  committee,  which  consisted  of  the  Receiver  and 
Accountant  General  of  the  Post  Office,  and  other 
gentlemen  selected  from  the  Post  Office  for  their  gen- 
eral ability,  but  especially  for  their  knowledge  of  ac- 
counts, in  June  and  July,  1869,  reported  that  the 
aggregate  of  the  sums  to  be  paid  to  the  six  telegraph 
companies  was  $28,575,235,^  the  companies  having 
put  in  claims  aggregating  $35,180,185. 

^Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  316,  Session  1873. 


Electric  and  International  Co 

British  and  Irish  Magnetic  Co... 

United  Kingdom  Co 

♦London  and  Provincial  Co 

Reuter's    Telegram    Co.    (Norder- 

ney  Cable)    

Universal    Private   Co 


Sums  to  be  Paid         Capitalization 


[4,694,130 

6,217,680 

2,811,320 

300,000 

3,630,000 
922,105 


6,200,000 

2,670,000 

1,750,000 

325,000 


1,330,000 


♦This  Company  was  paid  the  highest  market  value  of  its  shares 
on  the  Stock  Exchange  in  the  first  week  of  June,  1868,  plus  an 
allowance  for  prospective  profits. 


THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS    73 

While  the  Bill  had  been  before  the  Select  Committee, 
the  Government  had  agreed  to  purchase  the  properties 
of  Reuter's  Telegram  Company  (Norderney  Cable),  as 
well  as  of  the  Universal  Private  Company.  The  price 
paid  for  those  properties  absorbed  the  margin  on  which 
Mr.  Scudamore  and  the  Government  had  counted  for 
the  purchase  of  the  reversionary  rights  of  the  railways. 

In  the  meantime,  the  Disraeli  Ministry,  which  had 
carried  the  measure  of  1868,  had  been  replaced,  on 
December  9,  1868,  by  the  Gladstone  Ministry.  On 
July  5,  1869,  the  Marquis  of  Hartington,  Postmaster 
General,  laid  before  Parliament  a  Bill  authorizing  the 
Post  Office  Department  to  spend  $35,000,000  for  the 
purpose  of  carrying  out  the  act  of  1868.  The  Marquis 
of  Hartington  said  that  $28,575,000  would  be  required 
for  the  purchase  of  the  assets  of  the  telegraph  com- 
panies; that  $3,500,000  would  cover  the  claims  of  the 
railways,  which  had  not  yet  been  adjusted;  and  that 
$1,500,000  would  suffice  to  rearrange  the  telegraph 
lines  and  to  make  such  extensions  as  would  be  required 
to  give  Government  telegraph  offices  to  3,776  places, 
towns,  and  cities,  the  present  number  of  places  having 
telegraph  offices  being  1,882. 

The  Marquis  of  Hartington  stated  that  Parliament 
"was  quite  competent  to  repudiate  the  bargain  of  1868, 

if  they  thought  it   a  bad  one Having  given 

the  subject  his  best  consideration,  he  must  say,  with- 
out expressing  any  opinion  as  to  the  terms  of  the  bar- 
gain, that  if  they  were  to  begin  afresh,  he  did  not 


74  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

think  they  could  get  the  property  on  better  terms." 
He  added  that  the  Government  would  take  over  the 
telegraphs  of  the  companies  on  January  i,  1870,  on  the 
basis  of  paying  twenty  times  the  profits  of  the  year 
1867-68.  But  that  in  consequence  of  the  increase  of 
the  business  since  1867-68,  the  $28,575,000  which  the 
State  would  pay  the  telegraph  companies,  would  repre- 
sent, not  twenty  years'  purchase  of  the  profits  in  1870, 
but  considerably  under  seventeen  years'  purchase  of 
those  profits.  The  trade  of  the  Electric  and  Interna- 
tional had  been  found  to  be  growing  at  the  rate  of  18 
per  cent,  a  year;  that  of  the  British  and  Irish  at  the 
rate  of  32  per  cent."^ 

The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Mr.  Robert  Lowe, 
was  by  no  means  so  sanguine.  He  spoke  of  the  "im- 
mense price"  which  the  Government  was  asked  to  pay, 
"a  price  of  which  he,  at  all  events,  washed  his  hands 
altogether.  The  Right  Honorable  Gentlemen  opposite 
[Mr.  Hunt,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  in  1868], 
had  accused  them  of  appropriating  the  honor  of  this 
measure.  He  had  not  the  slightest  desire  to  contest 
the  point  with  the  Right  Honorable  Gentleman,  who 
was  welcome  to  it  all.  The  matter  was  found  by  the 
present  Government  in  so  complicated  a  state  that  it 
was  impossible  for  them  to  recede;  but  unless  the 
House  was  prepared  to  grant  that  [i.  e.  a  government 
monopoly]   without  which  they  believed  it  would  be 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  5,  1869,  p.  1,216  and 
following,  and  July  26,  p.  759  and  following. 


I 


THE  PURCHASE  OF  THE  TELEGRAPHS     75 

impossible  to  carry  on  the  business  effectively,  it  would 
be  better  that  they  should  reject  the  Bill  altogether.  "^ 

Mr.  Torrens  moved  an  amendment  adverse  to  the 
Bill,  but  his  motion  was  defeated  by  a  vote  of  148  to 
23.  Before  the  vote  was  taken,  Mr.  W.  Fowler,  of 
the  firm  of  Alexander  &  Company,  Lombard  Street, 
speaking  of  the  reversionary  rights  of  the  railway  com- 
panies, had  said :  "Therefore,  for  what  the  House  knew, 
there  might  be  contingent  liabilities  for  hundreds  of 
thousands  or  millions  of  pounds  sterling  more."^ 

The  measure  became  a  law  in  August,  1869;  and  on 
February  5,  1870,  the  telegraphs  of  the  United  King- 
dom were  transferred  to  the  Post  Office  Department. 
In  the  course  of  the  year  1870,  the  Government  bought 
the  properties  of  the  Jersey  and  Guernsey  Company 
and  of  the  Isle  of  Man  Company.  Those  purchases, 
together  with  a  large  number  of  minor  purchases  made 
in  1869,  but  not  previously  mentioned,  raised  the  total 
sum  paid  to  the  telegraph  companies  to  $29,236,735. 

Not  until  1879  were  the  last  of  the  claims  of  the 
railway  companies  adjusted.  The  writer  has  not  suc- 
ceeded in  finding  a  specific  official  statement  of  the 
aggregate  sum  paid  to  the  railway  companies  for  their 
reversionary  rights  and  for  the  grant  to  the  Post 
Office  of  perpetual  and  exclusive  way-leaves  over  their 
properties,  but  he  infers  that  that  sum  was  $10,000,- 
ocx)  or  $11,000,000.     That  inference  is  based  on  testi- 

^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  26,  1869,  p.  767. 
^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  26,  1869,  p.  747. 


76  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

mony  given  in   1888  by  Mr,  C.  H.  B.  Patey/   Third 

Secretary  to  the  Post  Office,  and  on  information  given 

by  the  Postmaster   General   in    i8oc;.^ 
Reversionary 

Rights  estimat-  It  will  be  recalled,  that  in  1869,  the 
ed  at  $3,500,000,  Marquis  of  Hartington,  Postmaster 
:^io,ooo,ooo  Qgneral,  had  told  the  House  of  Com- 
mons that  the  payments  for  the  rights  in  question 
would  not  exceed  $3,500,000.  The  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral doubtless  spoke  on  the  strength  of  assurances 
given  by  Mr.  Scudamore.  It  will  be  remembered 
also  that  Mr.  Leeman,  in  1868,  had  warned  the  House 
in  strong  terms  that  Mr.  Scudamore's  estimates  were 
not  to  be  trusted.  Finally,  it  will  be  remembered  that 
in  1869,  Mr.  W.  Fowler,  a  financier  of  high  standing, 
had  warned  the  House  of  Commons  that  "there  might 
be  contingent  liabilities  of  thousands  or  millions  of 
pounds  sterling  more." 

*  Report    from    the    Select    Committee    on    Revenue    Department 
Estimates,  1 888  ;  q.  i  ,984. 

^Report  of  the  Postmaster  General,  1895,  P«  37* 


1 


CHAPTER  V 

NONE  OF  MR.  SCUDAMORE'S  FINANCIAL  FORECASTS 
WERE  REALIZED 

The  completion  of  the  telegraph  system  cost  $8,500,000;  Mr. 
Scudamore's  successive  estimates  had  been  respectively  $1,000,000 
and  $1,500,000,  Mr.  Scudamore's  brilliant  forecast  of  the  increase 
of  traffic  under  public  ownership.  Mr.  Scudamore's  appalling 
blunder  in  predicting  that  the  State  telegraphs  would  be  self- 
supporting.  Operating  expenses  on  the  average  exceed  92.5% 
of  the  gross  earnings,  in  contrast  to  Mr.  Scudamore's  estimate  of 
51%  to  56%.  The  annual  telegraph  deficits  aggregate  26.5%  of 
the  capital  invested  in  the  plant.  The  financial  failure  of  the 
State  telegraphs  is  not  due  to  the  large  price  paid  to  the  telegraph 
companies  and  railway  companies.  The  disillusionment  of  an 
eminent  advocate  of  nationalization,  Mr.  W.  Stanley  Jevons. 

As  soon  as  the  telegraphs  had  been  transferred  to  the 
Government,  the  Post  Office  Department  set  to  work 
to  rearrange  the  wires  wherever  competition  had  caused 
dupHcation  or  triplication ;  to  extend  the  wires  into  the 
centre  of  each  town  or  place  "imperfectly"  served;  to 
build  lines  to  all  places  with  money  order  issuing  Post 
Offices  that  had  no  telegraphic  service;  to  enlarge  the 
local  telegraph  system  of  Metropolitan  London  from 
95  telegraph  offices  in  1869,  to  334  offices  at  the  close 
of  1870;  to  give  cities  like  Birmingham,  Leeds,  Edin- 

77 


78 


THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 


versus  Actual 
Expenditure 


Burgh,  Glasgow  and  Manchester,  from  14  to  32  tele- 
graph offices  each  ;^  to  provide  additional  wires  to  meet 
the  anticipated  growth  of  traffic;  and 
Expenditure  to  release  some  5,000  or  6,000  miles  of 
wire  for  the  exclusive  use  of  the 
railway  companies  in  the  conduct  of 
transportation.  For  these  several  purposes  the  Post 
Office  Department,  in  the  course  of  the  three  years 
ending  with  September,  1873,  erected  8,000  miles  of 
posts,  and  46,000  miles  of  wire;  strengthened  8,500 
miles  of  line;  laid  192  miles  of  underground  pipes  and 
23  miles  of  pneumatic  pipes;  and  laid  248  miles  of 
submarine  cable.  By  September,  1873,  the  Post  Office 
Department  had  spent  upon  the  rearrangement  and 
extension  of  the  telegraphs,  the  sum  of  $11,041,000.^ 

^Report  by  Mr.  Scudamore  on  the  Reorganization  of  the  Tele- 
graph System  of  the  United  Kingdom,  January,  1871. 

Number  of  telegraph  offices  before  and  after  the  transfer  of  the 
telegraphs  to  the  State : 


London  .... 
Birmingham 
Edinburgh    . 

Leeds    

Glasgow  . . . 
Manchester 


1869 


1870 


95 

334 

10 

14 

9 
10 

15 
18 

13 

19 

21 

32 

This  table  does  not  indicate  fully  the  expense  incurred  by  the 
State  in  providing  local  telegraph  systems.  Under  the  companies 
the  offices  were  all  concentrated  in  the  heart  of  the  city ;  under  the 
Post  Office  administration  the  offices  were  spread  throughout  the 
city  and  suburbs. 

'First  Report  from  the  Committee  on  Public  Accounts,  1873;  Ap- 
pendix, p.  118;  and  Report  from  the  Committee  on  Public  Accounts, 
1874;  Appendix,  p.  159  and  following. 


SCUDAMORE'S  FORECASTS  NOT  REALIZED       79 

Something  over  $2,500,000^  of  that  sum  represented 
the  cost  of  repairing  the  depreciation  suffered  by  the 
plant  in  the  years  1868  and  1869,  a  depreciation  for 
which  full  allowance  had  been  made  in  fixing  the  pur- 
chase price.  The  balance,  $8,500,000,  represented 
new  capital  outlay. 

In  1868  Mr.  Scudamore  had  stated  before  the  Select 
Committee  of  the  House  of  Commons  that  it  would 
cost  $1,000,000  to  rearrange  the  telegraphs  and  give 
perfect  telegraphic  service  to  2,950  places.^  In  1869, 
the  Postmaster  General,  the  Marquis  of  Hartington, 
had  told  the  House  of  Commons  that  $1,500,000  would 
cover  the  cost  of  rearranging  the  telegraphs  and  giv- 
ing perfect  accommodation  to  3,776  places.^  In  April, 
1867,  on  the  other  hand,  Mr.  W.  Stanley  Jevons,  an 
eminent  economist,  had  estimated  at  $12,500,000  the 
cost  of  "the  improvement  of  the  present  telegraphs, 
and  their  extension  to  many  villages  which  do  not  at 
present  possess  a  telegraph  station."^ 

Mr.  Scudamore's  estimate  of  the  cost  of  extending 
the  telegraphs  to  841  places  that  had  no  telegraphic 
accommodation,  was  based  on  the  assumption  that  each 
such  extension  would  require,  on  the  average,  the  erec- 
tion of  three-quarters  of  a  mile  of  telegraph  line.    But 


'^Report  by  Mr.  Scudamore  on  the  Reorganisation  of  the  Tele- 
graph System  of  the  United  Kingdom,  January,  1871,  p.  43. 

^  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868;  q.  1,864  and  1,922. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  5,  1869,  p.  1,217. 

*  Transactions  of  the  Manchester  Statistical  Society,  Session 
1866-67. 


80  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

when  the  Post  Office  Department  came  to  build  to 
"new"  places,  it  found  that  "the  opening  of  upward  of 
i,ooo  additional  telegraph  offices  necessitated  the  erec- 
tion of  not  less  than  3,000  miles  of  telegraph  line."^ 

The  results  have  shown  that  Mr.  Scudamore's  other 
estimates  of  the  cost  of  rearranging  and  extending  the 
telegraphs,  presented  by  himself  in  1868,  and  by  the 
Postmaster  General,  the  Marquis  of  Hartington,  in 
1869,  were  equally  wide  of  the  mark.  Numerous 
Committees  on  the  Public  Accounts  sitting  in  the  years 
1 87 1  to  1876,  together  with  the  Committee  on  Post 
Office  Telegraph  Department,  1876,  attempted  to  in- 
quire into  the  enormous  discrepancy  between  the  esti- 
mated cost  and  the  actual  cost  of  rearranging  and  ex- 
tending the  telegraphs.  But  none  of  those  attempts 
were  rewarded  with  any  success  whatever.^  The  rep- 
resentatives of  the  Post  Office  and  of  the  Treasury 
always  attributed  the  discrepancy  "to  the  purchase  of 
undertakings  which  were  not  contemplated  at  the  time 
when  the  original  measures  were  submitted  to  the 
House,  and  to  unforeseen  expenses  for  extensions." 
But  the  State,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  made  no  purchases 
beyond   those  contemplated   in    1869 — excepting  the 


*  special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868;  q.  1,922  and  94;  and  First  Report  from  the  Com- 
mittee on  Public  Accounts,  1873  ;  Appendix,  p.  96. 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Post  OMce  (Telegraph 
Department),  1876,  p.  xi.  "The  Committee  have  not  received  any 
full  and  satisfactory  explanation  of  these  great  differences  between 
the  estimated  expenditure  of  1869  and  the  actual  expenditure  in- 
curred up  to  1876." 


SCUDAMORE'S  FORECASTS  NOT  REALIZED       81 

purchase  of  the  Jersey  and  Guernsey  cable  for  $286,- 
750,  and  the  purchase  of  the  Isle  of  Man  cable  for 
$80,680.  As  for  unforeseen  extensions,  in  1869,  the 
Marquis  of  Hartington  had  counted  on  carrying  the 
telegraphs  to  3,776  places,  and  in  1878  there  were  but 
3,761  postal  telegraph  offices,  counting  the  300  offices 
in  London,  and  the  numerous  offices  in  the  several 
large  principal  cities.^ 


Mr.  Scudamore,  aided  by  the  state  of  public  opinion 
created  by  the  agitation  of  the  British  Chambers  of 
Commerce  under  the  leadership  of  the  Chamber  of 
Commerce  of  Edinburgh,  carried  away  the  Disraeli 
Ministry  and  the  Gladstone  Ministry.  Even  more 
powerful  than  Mr.  Scudamore's  argument  from  the 
extensive  use  made  of  the  telegraphs  on  the  Continent 

^Miscellaneous  Statistics  of  the  United  Kingdom,  current  issues 
from  1872  to  1882. 

Telegraph   Stations  open  to  the  public : 


1869 

2.1SS* 
0 
1.226 

1871 

1872 
0 

3.369 
1,804 

5,173 

22,000t 
91.093 

1873 

1874 
0 

3,756 
1,816 

1878 

0 
3,761 
i.SSS 

S.3I6 

? 
114.902 

1880 

Telegraph  Companies  .... 
Post  Office  Telegraphs... 
Railway  Stations** 

0 
2,441 
1.833 

0 
3.6S9 
1.81S 

4,474 

p 

105,292 

0 

3.929 
1.407. 

Miles  of  Line 

3.381 

21,751 
90,668 

4,274 

? 
68,998 

5.572 

24.000t 

106,730 

5.336 

23.iS6tt 
114.242 

Miles  of  Wire 

*In  1,882  places. 

"^ Report  of  the  Postmaster  General,   1895,  p.   36. 

tThe  Fortnightly  Review,  December,   1875,  W.  S.  Jevons. 

**For  the  benefit  of  the  traveling  public,  and  of  persons 
residing  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  railway  stations,  the  Post 
Office  made  arrangements  whereby  the  railway  companies  received 
messages  from  the  public  for  transmission  to  the  postal  telegraphs, 
and  received  messages  from  the  postal  telegraphs  for  delivery  to 
the  public. 

j} Report  of  the  Postmaster  General,  1880,  p.  16. 
6 


82  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

of  Europe,  was  Mr.  Scudamore's  promise  that  the  State 
telegraphs  should  begin  by  paying  a  profit  sufficient  to 
cover  the  interest  on  $30,000,000  at  the  lowest  esti- 
mate, and  $50,000,000  at  the  highest  estimate;  and 
that  the  profit  should  increase  with  the  advancing  years. 

Before  examining  the  evidence  upon  which  Mr. 
Scudamore  predicted  such  large  profits,  it  will  be  well 
to  consider  briefly  the  nature  of  the  evidence  afforded 
to  Mr.  Scudamore  by  Sir  Rowland  Hill's  epoch-mak- 
ing * 'invention  of  penny  postage."  This  is  the  more 
necessary,  since  Mr.  Scudamore  himself  cited  the  suc- 
cess of  penny  postage  in  support  of  his  proposal  for  a 
uniform  rate  of  24  cents  for  telegraph  messages.  Upon 
the  introduction  of  the  penny  postage,  the  letters 
Penny  Postage  carried  by  the  Post  Office  of  the  United 
Precedent  Kingdom  jumped  from  76,000,000  in 

1839  to  169,000,000  in  1840,  and  to  271,000,000  in 
1845.  ^^t  the  net  revenue  obtained  by  the  Post  Office 
Department  from  the  carriage  of  letters  fell  from  $8,- 
170,000  in  1839  to  $2,505,000  in  1840.  Though  the  net 
revenue  increased  each  year  beginning  with  1841,  not 
until  1863  did  it  again  reach  the  point  at  which  it  had 
been  in  1839.  In  1863,  the  number  of  letters  carried 
was  642,000,000 — almost  four  times  the  number  carried 
in  1840,  and  eight  times  the  number  carried  in  1839.^ 
In  short,  the  evidence  from  the  penny  postage  was,  that 
care  must  be  used  in  arguing  from  an  increase  of  busi- 
ness to  an  increase  of  net  revenue;  and  that  the  pros- 

'  See  foot-note  on  page  83. 


SCUDAMORE'S  FORECASTS  NOT  REALIZED       83 


I 


pect  of  a  great  increase  in  business  did  not  necessarily 
justify  the  incurrence  of  indefinitely  large  charges  on 
account  of  interest  on  capital  invested. 

Mr.  Scudamore  began  by  assuming  that  the  Post 
Office  would  take  charge  of  the  telegraphs  on  July  i, 
1869;  and  that  by  that  time  the  telegraph  companies 
would  have  developed  a  business  of  7,500,000  messages 
a  year.  On  the  basis  of  the  traffic  of  1866,  and  under 
the  companies'  charges,  55  per  cent,  of  the  business 
Mr.  Scudamore^s  ^ould  consist  of  messages  carried  100 
Revenue  Fore-  miles  or  less,  which  would  be  charged 
^^^^^  24  cents  each;  30  per  cent,  would  be 

messages  carried  from  100  to  200  miles,  being  charged 
36  cents  each ;  10  per  cent,  would  be  messages  carried 
beyond  200  miles,  which  would  be  charged  48  cents; 
and,  finally,  5  per  cent,  would  consist  of  messages  to 
and  from  Ireland,  which  would  be  charged  from  72 
cents  to  96  cents.  The  adoption  of  the  uniform  rate 
of  24  cents,  irrespective  of  distance,  would  reduce  by 


The  penny  postage  was  introduced  on  December  5,  1839. 


1839. 
1840. 
1845. 
1850. 
1859. 
1863. 


Letters  Carried 


76,000,000 
169,000,000 
271,000,000 
347,000,000 
545,000,000 
642,000,000 


Gross  Revenue 
$ 


11,955.000 
6,795,000 
9,440,000 
11,325,000 
16,150,000 
19,350,000 


Net  Revenue* 

$ 


8,170,000 
2,505,000 
3,810,000 
4,020,000 
7,230,000 
8,950,000 


♦The  British  Post  Office  does  not  charge  itself  with  interest  upon 
the  capital  invested  in  the  postal  business ;  it  charges  itself  only 
with  interest  upon  the  capital  boi;rowed  on  account  of  the  telegraphic 
business. 


84  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

33  per  cent,  the  charge  on  the  messages  sent  from  lOO 
to  200  miles,  and  would  increase  those  messages  by  90 
per  cent. ;  it  would  reduce  by  50  per  cent,  the  charge  on 
the  messages  carried  more  than  200  miles,  and  would 
increase  those  messages  by  90  per  cent. ;  and,  finally,  it 
would  increase  by  150  per  cent,  the  number  of  mes- 
sages between  Great  Britain  and  Ireland.  The  intro- 
duction of  the  uniform  24  cent  rate,  therefore,  would 
increase  the  total  number  of  messages  from  7,500,000 
to  10,612,500.  That  last  number  would  be  further 
increased  by  10  per  cent,  in  consequence  of  the  general 
increase  of  facilities,  and  a  material  reduction  in  the 
charges  made  for  the  delivery  of  messages  to  points 
outside  of  the  free  delivery  areas.  Thus  the  total  num- 
ber of  messages  that  the  Post  Office  telegraphs  would 
carry  in  the  first  year  would  be  11,673,000,  or,  say,  in 
round  numbers,  11,650,000. 

Since  the  average  message  would  be  somewhat  over 
20  words  in  length,  one  might  count  on  average  re- 
ceipts per  message  of  28  cents;  so  that  the  11,650,000 
messages  in  question  would  bring  the  Post  Office  a 
gross  revenue  of  $3,400,000. 

Mr.  Scudamore  next  proceeded  to  estimate  what  it 
would  cost  to  earn  the  $3,400,000  just  mentioned.  He 
began  with  the  total  working  expenses,  in  1866,  of  the 
four  leading  companies,  namely  $1,650,000.  He 
stated  that  the  companies  had  said  that  if  permitted  to 
consolidate,  they  could  reduce  expenses  by  $275,000  a 
year.     But  if  the  Post  Office  were  to  take  over  the 


SCUDAMORE'S  FORECASTS  NOT  REALIZED       85 

telegraphs,  it  would  reduce  the  expenses  by  more  than 
the  last  mentioned  sum,  for  it  could  use  the  existing 
Post  Office  buildings,  the  existing  staff,  and  so  forth. 
Deducting  numerous  other  items  representing  expenses 
that  the  companies  had  incurred  on  account  of  the 
operation  of  foreign  cables  and  the  conduct  of  other 
forms  of  business  that  the  Post  Office  would  discon- 
tinue, Mr.  Scudamore  reached  the  conclusion  that  the 
Post  Office,  in  1866,  could  have  operated  at  a  total 
cost  of  $1,325,000  the  plants  of  the  four  telegraph 
companies. 

Mr.  Scudamore  added  10  per  cent,  to  the  last 
mentioned  sum,  in  order  to  cover  the  cost  of  maintain- 
ing and  operating  the  extensions  that  the  State  pro- 
posed to  make  at  a  cost  of  $1,000,000.  He  took  10 
per  cent,  because  $1,000,000  was  tt  or  1^  of  the  capital 
invested  in  the  plants  of  the  telegraph  companies. 
That  raised  to  $1,457,500  Mr.  Scudamore's  estimate  of 
the  cost  of  operating  the  telegraphs  on  the  supposition 
of  a  business  of  7,500,000  messages. 

Mr.  Scudamore  then  allowed  33  per  cent,  or  $437,- 
250,  for  the  assumed  increase  in  the  number  of  mes- 
sages from  7,500,000  to  11,650,000.  He  said  the 
Post  Office  might  safely  assume  that  it  could  increase 
its  business  by  55  per  cent,  at  an  increase  of  33  per 
cent,  in  the  operating  expenses,  since  the  Electric  and 
International  Telegraph  Company  recently  had  in- 
creased its  business  by  105  per  cent,  at  an  increase  of 
33  per  cent,  in  the  operating  expenses.     Mr.  Scuda- 


S6  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

more's  conclusion  was  that  the  Post  Office  could  carry 
11,650,000  messages,  yielding  an  income  of  $3,400,- 
000,  at  a  cost  of  $1,895,000,  thus  obtaining  a  net 
revenue  of  $1,505,000. 

To  that  sum  must  be  added  the  net  revenue  to  be 
obtained  from  the  carriage  of  messages  for  the  news- 
paper press,  $60,000;  and  $225,000  to  be  obtained  from 
the  rental  of  the  State's  cables  to  the  several  foreign 
cable  companies.  Thus  Mr.  Scudamore  counted  on  a 
maximum  net  revenue  of  $1,790,000. 

By  similar  reasoning,  under  the  supposition  that  the 
total  number  of  messages  should  not  exceed  7,500,000, 
Mr.  Scudamore  arrived  at  a  minimum  estimated  net 
revenue  of  $1,015,000.  Taking  the  average  of  the 
two  foregoing  estimates,  he  said  the  Government 
"might  with  almost  entire  certainty  rely  upon  a  net 
revenue  within  a  range  of  from  $1,000,000  to  $1,800,- 
000,  the  mean  of  which  was  $1,400,000."  That  was 
for  the  first  year ;  in  the  subsequent  years  the  net  reve- 
nue would  increase  rapidly.  He  said:  "It  is  the  ex- 
perience of  all  people  who  have  worked  a  large  business 
of  this  kind  that  the  cost  does  not  by  any  means  in- 
crease in  proportion  to  the  increase  of  business;  you 
can  always  do  a  greater  amount  of  business  at  a  less 
proportionate  cost  than  you  can  do  a  smaller  amount." 

Mr.  Goschen  repeatedly  asked  Mr.  Scudamore 
whether  he  would  stand  by  his  estimates,  and  whether 
he  deemed  them  moderate,  adding  that  the  Select  Com- 
mittee was  taking  the  matter  almost  exclusively  on  his 


SCUDAMORE'S  FORECASTS  NOT  REALIZED       87 

[Mr.  Scudamore's]  evidence.  Mr.  Goschen  always 
received  the  strongest  assurances  that  the  Committee 
might  rely  on  the  estimates  submitted.^ 

Mr.  Scudamore's  predictions  as  to  the  growth  of 
traffic  that  might  be  expected  from  the  great  increase 
in  the  facilities  for  telegraphing,  and  from  the  reduc- 
tion of  the  charges  by  fully  one-half,  turned  out  to  be 
brilliant  indeed.  They  were  fully  realized.  The  num- 
ber of  messages  increased  from  about  6,500,000  in 
1869,  to  9,850,000  in  1870-71,  to  19,253,000  in  1874- 
75,  and  to  26,547,000  in  1879-1880.^ 

But  Mr.  Scudamore's  predictions  as  to  the  net  reve- 
nue to  be  obtained  from  the  State  telegraphs  turned 
out  to  be  appalling  blunders.  In  only  thirteen  out  of 
thirty-six  years,  from  1870-71  to  1905-06,  did  the  net 
revenue  reach  Mr.  Scudamore's  minimum  estimate;  in 
only  two  of  those  thirteen  years  did  it  reach  the  maxi- 
mum estimate ;  and  in  only  seven  of  the  thirteen  years 
did  it  reach  the  average  estimate.  In  the  period  1892- 
93   to    1905-06,    the   operating   expenses    aggregated 

*  special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868;  Appendix,  pp.  27  and  28;  and  q.  1,813  and  fol- 
lowing, and  2,439  and  following.  Compare :  Hansard's  Parlia- 
mentary Debates,  July  5,  1869,  p.  1,219  and  following,  the  Marquis 
of  Hartington,  Postmaster  General. 
'  Number  of  messages. 

1869 6,500,000  (estimated)  1884-85 33,278,000 

1870-71 . .   9,850,000  1889-90 62,403,000 

1871-72.  .12,474,000  1894-95-  •  .  .71,589,000 

1874-75..  19,253,000  '  1899-1900..  90,415,000 

1879-80 . .  26,547,000  1905-1906 . .  89,478,000 

In  1869  Mr.  Scudamore  revised  his  estimate  of  the  number  of 
messages  in  1870-71,  reducing  it  to  8,815,400.  Hansard's  Parlia- 
mentary Debates,  July  5,  1869,  p.  1,219,  the  Marquis  of  Hartington, 
Postmaster  General. 


88  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

$231,196,000,  while  the  gross  receipts  aggregated 
$229,761,000.  In  the  latter  sum  are  included  $8,552,- 
000,  the  proceeds  of  the  royalties  paid  the  Government 
by  the  British  National  Telephone  Company  for  the 
privilege  of  conducting  the  telephone  business  in  com- 
petition with  the  State  telegraphs.^  If  that  sum  be  ex- 
cluded from  the  postal  telegraph  gross  revenues,  as  not 
having  been  earned  by  the  telegraphs,  it  will  be  found 
that  in  the  period,  1892-93  to  1905-06,  the  operating 
expenses  exceeded  the  gross  revenue  by  $9,987,000. 

Mr.  Scudamore,  in  1869,  predicted  that  the  operat- 
ing expenses  would  be  51  per  cent,  to  56  per  cent,  of 
the  gross  revenue,  in  the  first  year  of  the  working  of 
the  telegraphs  by  the  Post  Office ;  and  that  they  would 
continue  to  be  correspondingly  low.  In  1875,  a  Com- 
mittee appointed  by  the  Treasury  reported  that  in  con- 

sequence  of  the  great  extension  of 
penses  under-  facilities  effected  since  1870,  "it  would 
estimated  by         be  difficult  for  the  Government  to  work 

the  Telegraph  Service  as  cheaply  as 
did  the  Companies,  but  a  reasonable  expectation  might 
be  entertained  that  the  expenses  might  be  kept  within 
70  per  cent,  or  75  per  cent,  of  the  gross  revenue.  That 
would  leave  a  margin  sufficient  to  pay  the  interest  on 


*  Garcke :  Manual  of  Electrical  Undertakings.  The  current  issues 
report  the  amount  of  these  royalties.  The  Report  of  the  Postmaster 
General,  1885,  p.  9,  and  Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  34,  Session  of 
1 90 1,  state  that  these  royalties  are  included  in  the  gross  revenue  of 
the  telegraphs. 


SCUDAMORE'S  FORECASTS  NOT  REALIZED       89 

the  debt  incurred  in  purchasing  the  telegraphs."^  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  the  operating  expenses  only  once  have 
come  within  the  limits  fixed  by  the  Committee  of  1875  ; 
and  at  the  close  of  1900-01,  they  had  averaged  92.5 
per  cent.^  Here  again,  the  telephone  royalties  are  in- 
cluded in  the  gross  receipts. 

On  March  31,  1906,  the  capital  invested  in  the  tele- 
graphs was  $84,812,000.^  To  raise  that  capital,  the 
Government  had  sold  $54,300,000  three  per  cent,  bonds 

*  Report  of  a  Committee  appointed  by  the  Treasury  to  investigate 
the  causes  of  the  increased  Cost  of  the  Telegraphic  Service  since  the 
Acquisition  of  the  Telegraphs  by  the  State,  1875,  p.  6. 

^Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  295,  Session  of  1902. 

Proportion  borne  by  operating  expenses  to  gross  revenue,  after 
excluding  from  operating  expenses  all  expenses  properly  chargeable 
to  capital  account.  The  capital  account  of  the  telegraphs  having 
been  closed  in  September,  1873,  the  Post  Office,  since  that  date, 
has  charged  to  operating  expenses  all  expenditures  on  account  of 
extensions,  the  purchase  of  sites,  and  the  erection  of  buildings. 

Average  percentage 
of  operating  expenses  Range 

1870-71 57.24 

1871-72 78.94 

1872-73  to  1874-75 88.77  85.13  to     92.40 

1875-76  to   1884-85 79-34  72.27  to     85.50 

1885-86  to  1891-92 91-31  87.72  to     95.30 

1892-93  to  1900-01 98.30  95-43  to  101.07 

1901-02  to   1905-06 100.38  99-69  to  108.06 

Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  34,  Session  of  1876.  Lord  John  Man- 
ners, Postmaster  General :  "In  the  first  two  years  after  the  transfer 
the  expenditure  was  kept  down,  because  no  charge  was  raised  for 
maintenance,  as  it  took  the  form  of  renewal  of  the  plant  of  the  late 
companies,  which,  between  1868  and  1870,  had,  in  some  instances, 
been  allowed  to  fall  into  decay,  and  was  therefore  considered 
properly  chargeable  against  capital." 
'  That  sum  was  made  up  as  follows : 

Telegraph   companies    $29,237,000 

Railway  companies    10,000,000 

Extensions:   1870  to   1873 11,041,000 

Extensions :  1874  to  1906 34,534,000 

$84,812,000 


90  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

at  an  average  price  of  about  92.3;^  and  for  the  rest, 
the  Government  had  drawn  upon  the  current  revenue 
raised  by  taxation. 

The  net  revenue  earned  by  the  telegraphs  covered 
the  interest  on  the  bonds  outstanding,  in  1870-71,  and 
Aggregate  in  the  years  1879-80  to  1883-84.     On 

Telegraph  Deficit  March  3 1,  1906,  the  sums  annually 
paid  by  the  Government  by  way  of  interest  that  had 
not  been  earned  by  the  telegraphs,  had  aggregated 
$22,530,000,  or  26.5  per  cent,  of  the  capital  invested 
in  the  telegraphs.^  Upon  the  sums  invested  since  1874, 
aggregating  $34,534,000,  the  Government  has  re- 
ceived no  interest. 

^Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  267,  Session  of  1870. 

^The  subjoined  table  gives,  for  successive  periods,  the  average 
capital  sums  upon  which  the  net  revenue  earned  by  the  telegraphs 
would  have  paid  the  interest ;  and  also  the  average  sums  actually 
invested  in  the  telegraphs  in  those  periods.  The  first  column  of 
the  table  is  constructed  on  the  assumption  that  the  interest  paid  by 
the  State  for  borrowed  money  was  3.25  per  cent,  from  1870-71  to 
1883-84 ;  3  per  cent,  from  1884-85  to  1888-89 ;  and  2.75  per  cent,  from 
1889-90  to  190001. 

The  ten  million  dollars  paid  to  the  railway  companies  some  time 
between  1873  and  1879  are  not  included  in  the  sum  put  down  for 
the  average  capital  investment  in  1875-76  to  1877-78,  since  it  has 
been  impossible  to  assign  that  payment  to  specific  years. 

The  results  of  the  year  1870-71  should  be  ignored,  since  the  cost 
of  the  maintenance  of  the  telegraphs  was  charged  to  capital  account 
in  the  year  in  question. 

The  net  revenue  The  average 

sufficed  to  pay  capital  actually 

interest  on:  invested  wai: 

$  $ 

1870-71 52,710,500  33,790,000 

1871-72  to  1874-75 20,090,000  40,045,000 

1875-76  to  1877-78 31,305,000  41,715,000 

1878-79  to  1884-85 52,785,000  54,510,000 

1885-86  to   1888-89 24,646,000  60,545,000 

1889-90  to  1891-92 44,033,000  63,446,000 

1892-93  to  1905-06 Nil  74,243,000 


SCUDAMORE^S  FORECASTS  NOT  REALIZED       91 

The  statement  is  commonly  made,  and  widely  ac- 
cepted, that  the  financial  failure  of  the  State  telegraphs 

Parliament  Re-  ^^  ^^^  ^^  ^^^  excessive  price  paid  for 
sponsible  for  the  plant.  But  that  statement  over- 
^^^^^^^  looks   two   facts:   that   since    1892-93 

the  telegraphs  have  not  earned  operating  expenses ;  and 
that  in  1880-81  the  telegraphs  became  abundantly  able 
to  earn  the  interest  even  upon  their  immoderate  capi- 
talization.^ The  statement  in  question  also  overlooks 
the  fact  that  the  telegraphs  easily  could  have  main- 
tained the  position  reached  in  1880-81,  had  not  the 
House  of  Commons  taken  the  reins  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  successive  Governments  of  the  day.  The  House 
of  Commons  after  1881  fixed  the  wages  and  salaries  to 
be  paid  the  Government  telegraph  employees  in  accord- 
ance with  the  political  pressure  those  employees  were 
able  to  bring,  not  in  accordance  with  the  market  value 
of  the  services  rendered  by  the  employees.  The  House 
of  Commons  also  reduced  the  tariff  on  telegrams  from 
24  cents  for  20  words,  to  12  cents  for  12  words.  It 
took  that  course  against  the  protests  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  day,  and  cut  deep  into  the  margin  of  profit 
of  the  telegraph  department. 

The  fact  that  the  House  of  Commons  after  1880-81 

*  The  net  revenue  sufficed  to  pay  the  interest  on : 

1877-78 30,165,000 

1878-79 41,190,000 

1879-80 51,310,000 

1880-81 69,455,000 

1881-82 55,055,000 

1886-87 i4»745.ooo 


92  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

took  the  reins  out  of  the  hands  of  the  successive  Gov- 
ernments of  the  day,  in  no  way  diminished  Mr.  Scuda- 
more's  responsibility  for  the  appalling  errors  into  which 
he  fell  when  he  forecast  the  financial  outcome  of  the 
nationalization  of  the  telegraphs.  Mr.  Leeman,  of  the 
Parliamentary  Select  Committee  of  1868,  expressly 
asked  Mr.  Scudamore :  "You  do  not  think  there  is  any 
fear  of  the  cost  being  increased  by  the  salaries  being 
much  increased  under  the  management  of  the  Post 
Office?"  Mr.  Scudamore  without  hesitation  replied 
in  the  negative,  though  he  had  just  stated  that  in  the 
Post  Office  and  in  all  Government  departments  the  pay 
of  the  lower  grades  of  employees  was  somewhat  higher 
than  it  was  in  commercial  and  industrial  life.^  More- 
over, Mr.  Scudamore,  as  one  of  the  two  chief  execu- 
tive officers  of  the  Post  Office,  must  have  been  aware 
that  the  Government  was  neither  perfectly  free  to  pro- 
mote men  according  to  their  merit,  and  irrespective  of 
length  of  service,  nor  free  to  discharge  men  who  were 
comparatively  inefficient  and  lax  in  the  discharge  of 
their  duties.  He  must  have  known  that  those  dis- 
abilities made  it  impossible  for  the  Post  Office  to  work 
as  cheaply  as  private  enterprise  worked. 

As  for  the  House  of  Commons  forcing  on  the  Gov- 
ernment the  12  cent  rate  for  messages  of  12  words, 
that  action  was  due  largely  to  the  expectations  raised 
by  Mr.  Scudamore  himself  in  1868  and  1869,  that  the 

*  special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868;  q.  3,296  to  3,302. 


SCUDAMORE'S  FORECASTS  NOT  REALIZED       93 

nationalization  of  the  telegraphs  would  soon  give  the 
public  a  twelve  cent  rate. 

Mr.  W.  Stanley  Jevons,  the  eminent  statistician  and 
economist,  who,  in  1866  to  1869,  had  warmly  sup- 
ported the  proposal  to  nationalize  the  telegraphs,  in 
Mr.  W.S.  Jevons*  1 875  pointed  out  that  while  the  postal 
Disillusionment  telegraph  traffic  had  increased  81  per 
cent,  in  the  period  1870  to  1874,  the  operating  ex- 
penses had  increased  no  per  cent.  He  said:  "The 
case  is  all  the  more  hopeless,  since  the  introduction  of 
the  wonderful  invention  of  duplex  telegraphy  has 
doubled  at  a  stroke,  and  with  very  little  cost,  the  carry- 
ing power  of  many  of  the  wires.  "^ 

In  1870  each  wire  afforded  one  channel  for  com- 
munication; in  1895  it  afforded  two  channels  under 
the  Duplex  system,  four  channels  under  the  Quadru- 
plex  system,  and  six  channels  under  the  Multiplex 
system.  In  1870  the  maximum  speed  per  minute  was 
60  to  80  words.  In  1895  the  fixed  standard  of  speed 
for  certain  circuits  was  400  words,  while  a  speed  of 
600  words  was  possible  of  attainment.  The  "repeat-' 
ers"  used  for  strengthening  the  current  on  long  circuits 
also  were  greatly  improved  after  1870.^ 

*  The  Fortnightly  Review,  December,  1875. 

'^  Report  of  the  Postmaster  General  for  1895;  Historical  Outline 
of  the  Telegraph  Service  since  1870. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  PARTY  LEADERS  IGNORE  THEIR  FEAR  OF  AN 
ORGANIZED    CIVIL   SERVICE 

Mr.  Disraeli,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  opposes  the  en- 
franchisement of  the  civil  servants.  Mr.  Gladstone,  Leader  of  the 
Opposition,  assents  to  enfranchisement,  but  expresses  grave  ap- 
prehensions of  evil  results. 

One  of  the  most  extraordinary  of  the  numerous 
astounding  episodes  in  connection  with  the  nationaHza- 
tion  of  the  telegraphs  was  the  fact  that  in  the  debates 
in  the  House  of  Commons  was  not  even  raised  the 
question  of  possible  danger  arising  from  increasing 
enormously  the  number  of  civil  servants.  That  is  the 
more  astounding,  since,  in  1867  and  1868,  prominent 
men  in  both  political  parties  had  grave  misgivings  as 
to  the  future  relations  between  the  State  and  its  em- 
ployees, even  though  those  employees  who  were  in  the 
Customs  Department,  the  Inland  Revenue  Depart- 
ment, and  the  Post  Office  were  at  the  time  disfranchised. 

In  July,  1867,  while  the  House  of  Commons  was 
passing  the  "Representation  of  the  People  Bill,"  Sir 
Harry  Vemey,  a  private  member,  moved  the  addition 
of  a  clause  to  enable  public  officers  connected  with  the 
collection  of  the  revenue  to  vote  at  elections.^     The 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  4,  1867,  p.  1,032  and 
following. 

94 


( 


LEADERS  IGNORE  FEAR  OF  CIVIL  SERVICE      95 

Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Mr.  Disraeli,  asked  the 
House  not  to  accept  the  Amendment.  He  said:  ''He 
wished  also  to  recall  to  the  recollection  of  the  com- 
mittee a  Treasury  Minute  which  had  been  placed  on  the 
table,  in  which  Minute  the  Government  had  drawn  at- 
tention to  the  impropriety  and  impolicy  of  officers  in 
those  branches  of  the  public  service  to  which  the 
Mr.  Disraeli  on  honorable  baronet  [Sir  Harry  Verney] 
Civil  Servants  had  referred,  exercising  their  influence 
over  Members  of  Parliament,  in  order  to  urge  upon 
the  Government  an  increase  of  their  salaries.  Even 
at  the  present  time  an  influence  was  exerted  which 
must  be  viewed  with  great  jealousy,  and  every  Gov- 
ernment, however  constituted,  would  find  it  necessary 
to  use  its  utmost  influence  in  restricting  overtures  of 
that  description.  But  what  would  be  the  position  of 
affairs  if  these  persons — so  numerous  a  body — ^were 
invested  with  the  franchise.  From  the  experience  of 
what  was  passing  in  this  city — and  he  wished  merely 
to  intimate,  and  not  to  dwell  upon  the  circumstance — 
he  was  led  to  believe  the  result  would  be  that  there 
would  be  an  organization  illegitimately  to  increase  the 
remuneration  they  received  for  their  services — a  re- 
muneration which,  in  his  opinion,  was  based  upon  a 
just  estimate.  He  did  not  deny  that  the  class  referred 
to  by  the  honorable  baronet  were  entirely  worthy  of 
public  confidence,  but  the  conferring  the  franchise  upon 
them  would  place  them  in  a  new  position,  and  would 
introduce  into  public  life  new  influences  which  would 


96  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

not  be  of  a  beneficial  character.  He  trusted  therefore 
that  the  committee  would  not  sanction  the  proposal  of 
the  honorable  baronet." 

The  amendment  was  lost ;  and  in  the  following  year, 
1868,  Mr.  Monk,  a  private  member,  carried  against 
the  Government  of  the  day,  a  bill  to  enfranchise  the 
revenue  officers.^ 

The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Mr.  G.  W.  Hunt, 
said  he  felt  bound  to  move  that  the  bill  be  committed 
this  day  three  months — i.  e.,  be  rejected.  He  said  it 
was  an  anomaly  in  the  laws  that  the  dockyard  laborers 
were  not  disfranchised.  ''If  the  matter  were  inquired 
into  calmly  and  dispassionately,  he  was  not  at  all  sure 
that  a  good  case  might  not  be  made  out  for  affixing  to 
them  the  same  disability  that  is  now  attached  to  the 
The  Chancellor  i-^venue  officers.  The  fact  did  not  at 
of  the  Exchequer  all  tend  to  the  purity  or  the  impartiality - 
on  Civil  Servants  ^£  electors  in  places  where  many  of 
these  men  were  employed,  and  strenuous  efforts  were 
made  by  members  representing  them  to  increase  the 
privileges  of  the  dockyard  men  and  the  number  of  per- 
sons employed,  which  did  not  tend  to  economy  or  the 
proper  husbanding  of  the  national  resources.  Con- 
tinual applications  were  made  by  these  gentlemen  [the 
employees   in   the   Revenue   Departments]    respecting 

"^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  10,  1868,  p.  1,352  and 
following;  June  12,  p.  1,5 33  and  following;  and  June  30,  1,868,  p. 
390  and  following.  Compare  also:  Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  325, 
Session  1867-68:  Copy  of  Report  to  the  Treasury  by  the  Commis- 
sioners of  Customs  and  Inland  Revenue  upon  the  Revenue  Officers' 
Disabilities  Bill. 


I 


LEADERS  IGNORE  FEAR  OF  CIVIL  SERVICE      97 

their  position  and  salaries,  and  these  appHcations  had 
of  late  years  taken  a  very  peculiar  form,  being  not 
merely  made  through  the  heads  of  departments,  or  by 
simple  memorial  to  the  treasury,  but  in  the  form  of 
resolutions  at  public  meetings  held  by  them,  and  com- 
munications to  Members  of  Parliament  by  delegates 
appointed  to  represent  their  interests.  He  put  it  to  the 
House,  whether,  in  the  circumstances  supposed,  the 
influence  possessed  by  them  would  not  be  very  con- 
siderably increased,  and  whether  the  Government  of 
the  day  would  not  have  far  greater  difficulty  in  ad- 
ministering these  departments  with  respect  to  the  posi- 
tion and  salaries  of  the  officers  concerned,  if  the  meas- 
ure were  carried."^ 

Mr.  Gladstone  said :  "The  suggestion  he  would  make 
would  be  that  Parliament  should  give  the  vote,  and, 
at  the  same  time,  leave  it  in  the  discretion  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  day  to  inhibit  any  of  these  officers  from 
taking  any  part  in  politics  beyond  giving  their  simple 

vote Again,    before    they    proceeded    to    lay 

down  the  principle  of  general  enfranchisement,  one 
thing  to  be  considered  was  the  very  peculiar  relations 
between  the  revenue  officers  and  the  Members  of  that 
Mr.  Gladstone's  House.  There  it  was  necessary  to 
Warning  speak  plainly.     He  was  not  afraid  of 

Government  influence  in  that  matter,  nor  of  an  influence 
in  favor  of  one  political  party  or  another ;  but  he  owned 

^  The  measure  was  carried  against  the  Government  by  a  vote  of 
79  to  47. 
7 


96  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

that  he  had  some  apprehension  of  what  might  be 
called  class  influence  in  that  House,  which  in  his 
opinion  was  the  great  reproach  of  the  Reformed  Par- 
liament, as  he  believed  history  would  record.  Whether 
they  were  going  to  emerge  into  a  new  state  of  things 
in  which  class  influence  would  be  weaker  he  knew  not ; 
but  that  class  influence  had  been  in  many  things  evil 
and  a  scandal  to  them,  especially  for  the  last  fifteen  or 
twenty  years;  and  he  was  fearful  of  its  increase  in 
consequence  of  the  possession  of  the  franchise,  through 
the  power  which  men  who,  as  members  of  a  regular 
service,  were  already  organized,  might  bring  to  bear 
on  Members  of  Parliament.  What,  he  asked,  was  the 
Civil  Service  of  this  country?  It  was  a  service  in 
which  there  was  a  great  deal  of  complaint  of  inade- 
quate pay,  of  slow  promotion,  and  all  the  rest  of  it. 
But,  at  the  same  time,  it  was  a  service  which  there  was 
an  extraordinary  desire  to  get  into.  And  whose 
privilege  was  it  to  regulate  that  desire?  That  of  the 
Members  of  that  House " 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE    HOUSE    OF    COMMONS    IS    RESPONSIBLE    FOR 

THE   FINANCIAL   FAILURE    OF  THE    STATE 

TELEGRAPHS 

Sir  S.  Northcote,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  in  Mr.  Disraeli's 
Ministry  of  1874  to  1880,  is  disillusioned.  The  State  telegraphs 
become  self-supporting  in  1879-80.  The  House  of  Commons, 
under  the  leadership  of  Dr.  Cameron,  M.  P.  for  Glasgow,  over- 
rides the  Ministry  and  cuts  the  tariff  almost  in  two.  In  1890-91  the 
State  telegraphs  would  again  have  become  self-supporting,  had 
not  the  House  of  Commons,  under  pressure  from  the  civil  service 
unions,  increased  wages  and  salaries.  The  necessity  of  making 
money  is  the  only  effective  incentive  to  sound  management. 

The  consideration  of  the  reasons  for  the  financial 
failure  of  the  State  telegraphs  may  begin  with  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  effect  of  the  building  of  unremunerative 
extensions.  In  1873  ^^^  Treasury  Department  forced 
the  Post  Office  Department  to  abandon  the  doctrine 
that  every  place  with  a  money  order  issuing  post  office 
was  of  right  entitled  to  a  telegraph  office.  The  treas- 
ury in  that  year  adopted  the  policy  of  demanding  a 
guarantee  from  private  individuals  whenever  it  did 
not  care  to  assume  the  risk  of  a  telegraph  office  failing 
to  be  self-supporting.^     The  new   policy,  of   course, 

*  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Revenue  Estimates,  1888 ; 
q.  2,396,  Mr.  C.  H.  B.  Patey,  Third  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office, 

99 


100  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

applied  only  to  places  not  yet  provided  with  telegraphic 
service,  for  the  withdrawal  of  an  established  service 
would  have  led  "to  an  immense  amount  of  public  in- 
convenience and  agitation  that  the  Government  would 
have  been  unable  to  resist."^ 

In  speaking  of  the  policy  of  requiring  guarantees  in 
order  to  check  the  pressure  brought  by  the  House  of 
Commons  for  additional  telegraphic  services,  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Sir  Stafford  Northcote, 
in  1875,  said:  'The  Government  cannot  give  the 
answer  that  private  companies  could,  and  I  am  sure 
did,  give.  This  is  a  point  worthy  of  consideration, 
not  so  much  in  regard  to  the  telegraph  service  itself,  in 
which  we  are  now  fairly  embarked,  and  of  which  we 
Sir  S.  Northcote's  i^iust  make  the  best  we  can,  as  in 
Disillusionment  reference  to  suggestions  of  acquisitions 
of  other  forms  of  property,  and  the  conduct  of  other 
kinds  of  business,  in  which  I  hope  the  House  will  never 
be  led  to  embark  without  very  carefully  weighing  the 
results  of  this  remarkable  experiment. "^ 

The  guarantee  in  question,  which  had  to  be  given 
by  private  individuals,  covered:  the  annual  working 
expenses;  interest  on  the  capital  investment;  sinking 
fund  payments  which  should  repay  in  seven  years  the 
capital  invested;  and  a  margin  for  certain  contingen- 
cies.^    In  August,   1 89 1,  was  abolished  the  provision 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Revenue  Estimates,  1888; 
q.  950,  Sir  S.  A.  Blackwood,  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  15,  1875,  P-  1.025. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  4,  1887,  p.  1,126,  the 
Marquis  of  Salisbury,  Prime  Minister. 


HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  IS  RESPONSIBLE         101 

requiring  a  guarantee  of  the  repayment  of  the  capital 
in  seven  years,^  At  the  same  time,  the  local  govern- 
ments were  authorized  to  give  the  guarantee  that  con- 
tinued to  be  required.^  In  1897,  upon  the  occasion  of 
Her  late  Majesty's  Diamond  Jubilee,  the  Treasury 
authorized  the  Post  Office  to  assume  one-half  of  the 
burden  of  non-paying  telegraphic  services;  and  since 
May  I,  1906,  the  Post  Office  assumes  two-thirds  of 
that  burden.^ 

The  guarantees  demanded  after  1873  proved  an 
effective  check  upon  log-rolling.  For  example,  in 
1876,  Catrine,  in  Ayrshire,  with  a  population  of  2,000, 
still  was  without  telegraph  service,  while  Tarbolton, 
in  Ayrshire,  population  500,  had  acquired  such  service 
previous  to  1873.*  ^^  the  period  from  1874  to  1878 
the  number  of  postal  telegraph  offices  increased  only 
from  3,756  to  3,761. 

Before  leaving  this  subject,  it  is  necessary  to  warn 
the  reader  against  misleading  tables  published  in 
several  official  documents,  and  purporting  to  show 
that  non-paying  offices  rapidly  became  self-supporting.^ 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  31,  1893,  p.  1,580, 
Mr.  A.  Morley,  Postmaster  General. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  May  27,  1892,  p.  134,  Sir 
James  Fergusson,  Postmaster  General. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  9,  1901,  p.  289,  Mr. 
Austen  Chamberlain,  Postmaster  General;  and  May  g,  1906,  p.  1,294, 
Mr.  Sydney  Buxton,  Postmaster  General. 

*  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Post  Office  (Telegraph 
Department),  1876,  Mr.  C.  H.  B.  Patey,  Principal  Clerk  in  the  Post 
Office;  q.  3,705  and  following,  and  2,021. 

°  Report  of  a  Committee  appointed  by  the  Treasury  to  inves- 
tigate  the  Causes  of  the  Increased  Cost  of  the  Telegraph  Service 


102 


THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 


Those  tables  are  constructed  on  the  basis  of  including 
in  the  cost  of  telegraph  offices  only  the  allowance  to 
the  local  postmaster  for  telegraph  work,  and  the  cost 
of  maintaining  the  instruments  in  the  office,  and  of  ex- 
cluding the  cost  of  maintaining  the  wire,  the  cost  of 
additional  force  required  at  the  central  station  in  Lon- 
don and  at  the  district  centres  because  of  the  large  num- 
ber of  outlying  branches,  as  well  as  the  interest  on  the 
capital  invested.  Those  omissions  led  the  Treasury 
Committee  of  1875  to  say:  "We  fear  the  full  cost  of 
working  these  numerous  and  unremunerative  offices  is 
not  realized  [appreciated]."  In  1888,  Mr.  C.  H.  B. 
Patey,  Third  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office,  was  asked 
by  a  Select  Committee  of  Parliament:  "Where  you 
have  established  telegraph  offices  at  money  order  offices 
under  guarantee  from  individuals  interested,  do  you 
find  that  eventually  these  offices  pay?"  He  replied: 
"No;  in  exceedingly  few  instances  do  they  pay.  The 
guarantee  has  continued,  and  after  seven  years  we  have 
got  a  fresh  guarantee  in  order  to  continue  the  office."^ 
Mr.    Patey's   testimony   is  corroborated  by   the  con- 

since  the  Acquisition  of  the  Telegraphs  by  the  State,  1875,  p.  8;  and 
Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  34,  Session  of  1876,  p.  6. 

Non-Paying  Telegraph  Offices 


1872. 
1874. 
1875. 


London 


The  rest  of 

England 

and  Wales 


417 
303 
150 


Scotland 


40 

28 

6 


Ireland 


261 

III 

72 


Total 


728 
449 
228 


^Report   from   the   Select   Committee   on   Revenue    Departments 
Estimates,  1888;  q.  2,621. 


HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  IS  RESPONSIBLE         103 

tinued,  and  successful,  agitation  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons for  the  reduction  of  the  guarantee  demanded  by 
the  Treasury. 

The  second  reason  for  the  financial  failure  of  the 
State  telegraphs  is,  that  while  the  precipitate  reduc- 
tions made  in  the  rates  charged  to  the  public  led  to  a 
great  increase  in  the  number  of  messages  transmitted, 
that  very  increase  of  business  was  accompanied  by  such 
augiunented  operating  expenses,  that  some  years 
elapsed  before  the  reduced  average  margin  of  profit  per 
message  carried  sufiiced  to  pay  the  interest  on  the 
immoderate  capitalization  of  the  State  telegraphs.  The 
increase  in  the  operating  expenses  was  in  part  inevit- 
able ;  in  part  it  was  due  to  the  waste  inherent  in  all  busi- 
ness operations  conducted  by  executive  officers  who 
hold  office,  either  at  the  pleasure  of  legislative  bodies 
elected  by  manhood  suffrage,  or  at  the  pleasure  of  large 
bodies  of  voters. 

In  1876,  Mr.  C.  H.  B.  Patey,  Principal  Clerk  in  the 
Post  Office  Department,  stated  that  the  average  of  the 
operating  expenses  per  telegraphic  message  trans- 
mitted was  16  cents  to  18  cents.^     At  that  time,  with  a 

'^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Post  OiHce  (Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  2,712,  2,713  and  3,734. 

Average  operating  expenses  per  telegram :  Cents 

At  office  where  handed  in 2 

For  receipt  at  transmitting  office 3 

For  forwarding  from  transmitting  office 3 

For  receipt  at  delivery  office 3 

For  delivery  to  addressee 2 

Stationery   forms  used i 

Rent   of   offices,   way-leaves,   and  maintenance   of  wires   and 

instruments    2  to  4 

16  to  18 


104  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

traffic  of  2i,ooo,ocx)  messages  a  year,  and  average 
receipts  per  message  of  28  cents,  the  net  revenue  of 
the  telegraphs  was  $1,060,000,  while  the  interest  on 
the  bonds  outstanding  was  $1,475,000.  In  1879-80, 
with  a  traffic  of  24,500,000  messages,  average  receipts 
per  message  of  26  cents,  the  telegraphs  yielded  a  net 
revenue  of  $1,667,000,  while  the  interest  on  the  bonds 
outstanding  was  $1,632,000.  And  in  1880-81,  with 
a  traffic  of  27,300,000  messages,  the  net  revenue  rose 
to  $2,257,000,  while  the  interest  on  the  bonds  out- 
standing remained  at  $1,632,000.  A  large  part  of 
that  improvement  was  due  to  a  diminution  in  the  waste 
with  which  the  telegraphs  had  been  conducted  in  1874 
to  1878.  The  nature  and  the  extent  of  that  waste  are 
indicated  in  the  fact  that  the  number  of  clerks,  teleg- 
raphists, and  subordinate  engineers  was  reduced 
from  6,783  in  1876,  to  6,220  in  1880/  at  the  same  time 
that  the  number  of  telegraph  offices  was  increased  from 
3,741  to  3,929,  and  the  number  of  messages  was  in- 
creased from  21,000,000  to  24,500,000. 

In  1880-81,  the  telegraphs  earned  3.25  per  cent,  on 
$69,455,000,2  which  was  $16,180,000  in  excess  of  the 

^Miscellaneous  Statistics  of  the  United  Kingdom,  current  issues. 
2 

The  net  revenue 
Messases  paid  325  per  cent, 

interest  on : 

$ 

1875-76 20,974,000  32,600,000 

1877-78 22,172,000  30,165,000 

1878-79 22,490,000  41,190,000 

1879-80 24,500,000  51,310,000 

1880-81 27,300,000  69,455,000 

1884-85 33,300,000  45,710,000 


HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  IS  RESPONSIBLE         105 

total  capital  invested  in  them.  Under  conditions 
which  shall  be  described  on  a  subsequent  page,  the 
Government,  "very  much  at  the  instance  of  the  House 
of  Commons,"^  raised  wages  and  salaries,  so  that,  in 
the  period  from  1 880-81  to  1884-85,  the  expenses  on 
The  Telegraphs  account  of  salaries  and  wages  increased 
become  self-  $1,100,325,  while  the  gross  receipts 
supporting  increased  only  $752,635.     In  1884-85, 

the  net  revenue  sufficed  to  pay  the  interest  at  3.25  per 
cent,  on  $45,710,000  only. 

In  the  meantime,  on  March  29,  1883,  the  House  of 
Commons  had  carried  against  the  Government  of  the 
day,  the  resolution  of  Dr.  Cameron,  Member  of  Parlia- 
ment from  Glasgow :  "That  the  time  has  arrived  when 
the  minimum  charge  for  Inland  Postal  Telegrams 
should  be  reduced  to  12  cents. "^  Dr.  Cameron  said: 
"He  brought  forward  the  motion — ^and  he  did  so  last 
year^ — because  he  was  absolutely  opposed  to  the  taxa- 
tion of  telegrams  [i.  e.,  to  raising  more  revenue  from 
the  telegraphs  than  was  requisite  to  paying  the  inter- 
est on  the  bonds  outstanding] ;  and  he  believed  that 
taxation  could  be  levied  in  no  other  manner  that  would 
be  so  prejudicial  to  the  commerce,  intercourse,  and 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  30,  1885,  p.  1,072  and 
following,  Mr.  Shaw  Lefevre,  Postmaster  General,  1883-84. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  29,  1883,  p.  995  and 
following. 

'Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  26,  1882,  p.  422,  Dr. 
Cameron  moves  the  resolution:  "That  the  working  of  the  Postal 
Telegraph  Service,  with  a  view  to  the  realization  of  profit,  involves 
a  Tax  upon  the  use  of  Telegrams ;  that  any  such  Tax  is  inexpedient, 
and  that  the  profits  derived  from  the  service  is  now  such  that  the 
charges  for  Inland  Telegrams  should  be  reduced." 


106  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

convenience  of  the  country.  At  the  present  moment 
there  was  practically  no  taxation  of  telegrams,  or,  at 
all  events,  the  principle  of  the  taxation  of  telegrams 
had  not  been  affirmed.  The  surplus  revenue  [above 
the  interest  on  the  debt  outstanding]  earned  up  to  the 
present  time  had  been  so  small  that  it  was  impossible 
by  sacrificing  it  to  confer  any  substantial  advantage 
upon  the  public.  But  the  telegraph  revenue  was  in- 
creasing; and  it  appeared  to  him  that  they  had  now 
arrived  at  a  point  where  a  remission  of  taxation  must 
be  made  in  the  shape  of  extra  facilities  [i.  e.,  reduced 
charges]  for  the  public,  or  the  vicious  principle  of  the 
taxation  of  telegrams  for  the  purpose  of  revenue  must 
be  affirmed.  They  had,  it  might  be  contended,  not  yet 
exactly  arrived  at  that  point,  but  they  were  remark- 
ably near  it;  and  his  object  in  bringing  forward  the 
motion  from  year  to  year  had  been  to  afford  the 
Government  no  excuse  for  allowing  the  point  to  be 
passed,  but  to  bring  up  the  subject  every  year;  and  the 
moment  it  was  admitted  that  a  change  could  be  made 
without  loss  to  the  taxpayers  he  should  ask  the  House 
to  indicate  its  opinions  that  the  change  might  be  made. 
....  He  maintained  that  the  principle  of  taxing  tele- 
grams was  most  erroneous.  It  was  one  of  the  worst 
taxes  on  knowledge* — a  tax  on  economy,  on  time,  and 
on  the  production  of  wealth.  Instead  of  maintaining  a 
price  which  was  prohibitory  not  only  to  the  working 

^Ever  since  the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs  the  newspaper 
press  messages  had  been  carried  at  special  rates  which  did  not  cover 
operating  expenses. 


HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  IS  RESPONSIBLE        107 

classes  but  also  to  the  middle  classes,  they  ought  to  take 
every  means  to  encourage  telegraphy.  They  ought  to 
educate  the  rising  generation  to  it ;  and  he  would  sug- 
gest to  the  Government  that  the  composing  of  tele- 
grams would  form  a  useful  part  of  the  education  in  our 
board  schools." 

The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Mr.  Childers, 
"hoped  the  House  would  not  agree  to  the  motion" 
even  if  it  were  ready  to  accept  Dr.  Cameron's  estimate 
that  the  immediate  reduction  in  the  net  revenue  would 
not  exceed  $850,000.  "He  had  heard  with  surprise 
in  the  course  of  the  debate  some  of  the  statements 
which  had  been  made  in  regard  to  the  unimportance 
of  large  items  of  expenditure  [and  of  revenue] ;  and  he 
was  all  the  more  surprised  when  he  remembered  the 
great  anxiety  which  had  been  expressed  during  the 
present  session  in  regard  to  the  Public  Expenditure, 
and  the  care  which  ought  to  be  taken  over  it."^ 

Dr.  Cameron,  in  the  course  of  his  speech  in  1882, 
quoted  a  statement  recently  made  by  Mr.  Fawcett, 
Postmaster  General,  to  the  effect  that  there  was  an 
average  of  80,000  telegrams  a  day  for  5,600  offices,  or 
14  telegrams  per  office.  The  representative  from 
Glasgow  added :  "The  state  of  things  which  they  now 
had,  therefore  amounted  to  this — that  from  each  tele- 
graph office  was  sent  a  number  of  messages  which 
afforded  a  little  over  half  an  hour's  work  per  day  for 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  29,  1883,  P"  i»oi8  and 

following. 


108  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  operator.  It  would,  therefore,  at  once  be  seen  that 
there  was  ample  room  for  increased  business,  without 
any  increase  of  expenditure."^  The  foregoing  argu- 
ment overlooked  the  fact  that  the  wires  between  the 
large  cities  were  being  worked  to  something  like  their 
full  capacity;  and  that  the  low  average  of  14  messages 
per  office  was  due  solely  to  the  existence  of  hundreds 
of  offices  in  small  places  that  had  very  little  traffic. 
And  shortly  after  the  House  of  Commons  had  passed 
Dr.  Cameron's  resolution,  in  1883,  against  the  protest 
of  the  Government,  the  Treasury  authorized  the  Post 
Office  to  spend  $2,500,000  in  putting  up  15,000  miles 
of  additional  wires,  and  in  otherwise  preparing  for  the 
great  increase  in  business  that  would  arise  between  the 
larger  towns  in  consequence  of  the  reduction  of  the 
tariff.2  And  by  July  5,  1885,  three  months  before 
the  date  set  for  putting  into  force  the  reduced  rate,  the 
Post  Office  had  engaged  1,202  additional  telegraphists 
and  learners,^  to  assist  in  doing  the  business  which  Dr. 
Cameron  in  1882,  had  said  could  be  done  "without  any 
great  increase  of  expenditure." 

On  March  30,  1885,  Mr.  Shaw-Lefevre,  Postmaster 
General,  brought  in  a  bill  to  give  effect  to  Dr.  Camer- 


"^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  26,  1882,  p.  427. 

^Treasury  Minute,  June  14,  1883,  zvith  Regard  to  Reduction  of 
the  Minimum  charge  for  Post  OMce  Telegrams ;  and  Hansard's 
Parliamentary  Debates,  April  24,  1884,  p.  499,  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer;  and  April  24,  p.  569,  and  August  7,  p.  138,  Mr.  Fawcett, 
Postmaster  General. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  5,  1885,  p.  1,825,  Lord 
John  Manners,  Postmaster  General. 


HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  IS  RESPONSIBLE        109 

on's  resolution  of  March  29,  1883.^  The  measure 
provided  for  a  rate  of  12  cents  for  not  exceeding  12 
words,  address  to  be  counted,  and  one  cent  for  each 
additional  word.  The  Postmaster  General  began  by 
reminding  the  House  of  Commons  that  Dr.  Cameron's 
resolution  had  been  carried  against  the  Government, 
and  by  a  considerable  majority.  That  the  Post  Office 
has  spent  $2,500,000  in  preparing  for  the  increase  of 
business  anticipated  from  the  12  cent  tariff.  That  the 
loss  of  net  revenue  was  estimated  at  $900,000  for  the 
first  year ;  and  that  it  would  take  four  years  to  recover 
that  loss.  That  since  Dr.  Cameron's  resolution  had 
Tariff  is  cut  heQYi  passed,  the  financial  position  of 
almost  in  two  the  telegraph  department  had  grown 
"decidedly  worse,"  the  net  revenue  having  fallen  from 
$2,200,000  to  $1,275,000,  the  latter  sum  yielding 
barely  2.5  per  cent,  on  the  capital  invested  in  the  tele- 
graphs, $55,000,000.  Mr.  Shaw-Lefevre  said  the  de- 
crease in  the  net  revenue  had  been  due  "to  the  very 
considerable  additions  to  the  salaries  of  the  telegraph- 
ists and  other  officers  made  two  or  three  years  ago 
very  much  at  the  instance  of  honorable  Members  of  the 
House,  and  which  Mr.  Fawcett  [the  then  Postmaster 
General]  considered  to  be  absolutely  necessary,"  and 
also  to  increased  cost  of  maintenance^  arising  from  the 
necessity   of   replacing   worn-out    plant.     The    Post- 

^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  30,  1885,  p.  1,072  and 
following. 

^The  increase  in  salaries  and  wages  in  1880-81  to  1884-85  was 
$1,100,000,  and  the  increase  in  the  cost  of  maintenance  was  $538,000. 


110  THE  BRITISH  STA IE  TELEGRAPHS 

master  General  also  drew  attention  to  the  fact  that  a 
new  and  dangerous  factor  had  appeared :  the  competi- 
tion of  the  telephone.^ 

The  Bill  became  law ;  and  the  12  cent  tariff  went  into 
effect  on  October  i,  1885,  the  close  of  the  first  half  of 
the  fiscal  year  1885-86.  The  number  of  messages 
jumped  from  33,000,000  to  50,000,000,  while  the  net 
revenue  dropped  from  $1,370,000  to  $440,000.  In 
the  next  three  years,  1887-88  to  1889-90,  the  number 
of  messages  increased  to  62,400,000,  and  the  net  rev- 
enue rose  to  $1,451,000,  or  within  $431,000  of  the 
interest  on  the  capital  invested,  $62,748,000.  In  the 
following  year,  1890-91,  the  messages  continued  to 
increase  at  the  rate  at  which  they  had  increased  in  the 
three  preceding  years,  and  the  net  revenue  would  once 
more  have  sufficed  to  pay  the  interest  on  the  capital 
invested,  had  the  operating  expenses  not  been  swollen 
by  increases  in  wages  and  salaries  granted  under  pres- 
sure brought  by  the  telegraph  employees  upon  the 
House  of  Commons.  The  raising  of  salaries  and 
wages  continued  through  the  subsequent  years;  and 
in  the  thirteen  years  1893-94  to  1905-06,  the  State 
telegraphs  have  earned  the  operating  expenses  in  five 
years  only.^ 

In  1888,  the  Select  Committee  on  Revenue  Depart- 
ments Estimates  reported  as  follows:  "Your  Com- 
mittee are  of  the  opinion  that  the  reasons  urged  against 

*  Compare  also  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  6,   1887, 
p.  1,180,  Mr.  Shaw-Lefevre. 
"See  table  on  page  iii. 


HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  IS  RESPONSIBLE        HI 

treating  the  Post  Office  as  a  commercial  business  are 
not  applicable  in  anything  like  the  same  degree  to  the 
Telegraph  Department ;  and  that  the  increasing  annual 
deficit  in  the  accounts  of  the  latter  cannot  be  viewed 
otherwise  than  with  grave  concern.  Looking  to  the 
increasing  costliness  of  the  service  as  a  whole,  and  to 
the  constant  pressure  upon  it  of  demands  for  increased 
and  unprofitable  expenditure,  your  committee  deem  it 
their  duty  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Depart- 
ment of  the  Postmaster  General,  in  all  its  branches,  is 
a  vast  Government  business,  which  is  most  likely  to 
continue  to  be  conducted  satisfactorily,  if  it  should 
also  continue  to  be  conducted  with  a  view  to  profit 
[beyond  the  payment  of  interest  on  the  debt  outstand- 
ing] ,  as  one  of  the  revenue  yielding  departments  of  the 
State.  Excessive  expenditure  appears  to  your  com- 
mittee to  be  sooner  or  later  inevitable  in  a  great  Govern- 
ment business  which  is  not  administered  with  a  view 
to  an  ultimate  profit  to  the  State." 


Year 


1884-85. 
1885-86. 
1886-87. 
1887-88. 
1888-89. 
1889-90. 
1890-91 . 
1891-9^- 
1892-93. 


Number  of 
Messages 


33,278,000 
39,146,000 
50,244,000 
53.403.000 
57,765,000 
62,403,000 
66,409,000 
69,685,000 
69,908,000 


Net  Rev- 
enue, 

$ 


1,371,000 

839,000 

442,000 

614,000 

1,061,000 

1,451,000 

1,259,000 

922,000 

94,000 


Year 


1894-95. 
1895-96, 
1896-97. 
1899-00. 
1901-02. 
1902-03. 
1903-04, 
1904-05. 
1905-06. 


Number  of 
Messages 


71,589,000 
78,840,000 
79,423,000 
90,415,000 
90,432,000 
92,471,000 
89,997,000 
88,969,000 
89,478,000 


Net  Rev- 
enue, 

$ 


— 50,000 

646,000 

678,000 

326,000 

— 848,000 

— 548,000 

— 1,530,000 

— 917,000 

— 63,500 


The   minus  sign  denotes   an   excess  of  operating  expenses  over 
receipts. 


UNIVEIRS/TY  )) 

Of 


112  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Had  the  House  of  Commons  permitted  the  succes- 
sive Governments  of  the  day  to  act  upon  the  doctrine 
contained  in  the  foregoing  quotation,  the  State  tele- 
graphs would  have  been  self-supporting  ever  since  the 
year  1 880-81.  They  would  have  paid  the  full  interest 
upon  the  whole  capital  invested  in  them ;  in  spite  of  the 
high  prices  paid  to  the  telegraph  companies  and  the 
railway  companies  for  the  sale  of  those  companies' 
plants  and  rights. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  STATE  TELEGRAPHS  SUBSIDIZE  THE 
NEWSPAPER    PRESS 

Why  the  newspaper  press  demanded  nationalization.  Mr. 
Scudamore  gives  the  newspaper  press  a  tariff  which  he  deems 
unprofitable.  Estimates  of  the  loss  involved  in  transmitting  press 
messages,  made  by  responsible  persons  in  the  period  from  1876 
to  1900.    The  State  telegraphs  subsidize  betting  on  horse  races. 

Before  proceeding  with  the  further  discussion  of 
the  intervention  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  the  de- 
tails of  the  administration  of  the  State  telegraphs,  it  is 
necessary  to  review  briefly  the  tariff  on  messages  for 
•the  newspaper  press. 

Before  the  telegraphs  had  been  acquired  by  the  State, 
the  telegraph  companies  maintained  a  press  bureau 
which  supplied  the  newspapers  with  reports  of  the  de- 
bates in  Parliament,  foreign  news,  general  news,  a 
certain  amount  of  London  financial  and  commercial 
intelligence,  and  the  more  important  sporting  news. 
While  Parliament  was  in  session,  the  messages  in 
question  averaged  about  6,000  words  a  day;  during 
the  remainder  of  the  year  they  averaged  about  4,000 
words  daily.  The  annual  subscription  charges  for  the 
aforesaid  services  ranged  from  $750  to  $1,250.  Before 
the  Select  Committee  of  1868,  the  representatives  of 
8  113 


114  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  newspapers  asserted  that  those  subscription  charges 
yiel'ded  the  telegraph  companies,  on  an  average,  8 
cents  per  loo  words.  They  further  asserted  that  the 
telegraph  companies  ascribed  62.5  per  cent,  of  the  cost 
of  the  press  bureau  to  the  transmission  of  the  news; 
and  37.5  per  cent,  to  the  collecting  and  editing  of  the 
news.^  But  neither  the  representatives  of  the  press, 
nor  the  Select  Committee  itself,  called  any  representa- 
tives of  the  telegraph  companies  to  testify  upon  these 
latter  points. 

The  subscribers  to  the  companies'  press  bureau  serv- 
ice also  were  allowed  to  send  messages  at  one-half  the 
rate  charged  to  the  general  public ;  and  in  case  the  same 
newspaper  message  was  sent  to  several  newspapers  in 
the  same  town,  the  charge  for  each  address  after  the 
first  one  was  25  per  cent,  of  the  sum  charged  the  first 
addressee.  By  cooperation,  therefore,  the  newspapers  in 
the  larger  towns  were  able  to  obtain  considerable  re- 
ductions from  the  initial  charge,  which,  as  already 
stated,  was  50  per  cent,  of  the  tariff  charged  the  gen- 
eral public.^  Apparently,  however,  little  use  was 
made  of  these  privileges.     In  1868,  for  instance,  the 


^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  OfUce  (Tele- 
graph Department),  1876,  J.  E.  Taylor,  Proprietor  of  the  Man- 
chester Guardian;  q.  3,835  to  3,849,  and  1,246;  and  C.  H.  B.  Patey, 
Principal  Clerk  in  the  Post  Office  Department;  q.  3,452  and  follow- 
ing, 3,845,  3,377,  and  3,383  ;  and  Report  by  Mr.  Scudamore  on  the 
Re-organization  of  the  Telegraph  System  of  the  United  Kingdom, 
1871,  pp.  31   and  32. 

'  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs  Bill,  1868;  Dr.  Cameron.  Editor  and  Manager  of  the  North 
British  Daily  Mail;  q.  1,430  and  following. 


STATE  TELEGRAPHS  SUBSIDIZE  THE  PRESS   115 

subscriptions  to  the  press  bureau  aggregated  $150,000, 
whereas  the  sums  paid  for  messages  to  individual  news- 
papers aggregated  only  $10,000.^ 

The  newspaper  proprietors  admitted  that  the  charges 
for  the  press  bureau  service  were  entirely  reasonable; 
The  Newspapers'  but  they  desired  to  organize  their  own 
Grievance  press  bureaux  on  the  ground  that  they 

were  the  better  judges  of  what  news  the  public  wanted. 
Since  the  telegraph  companies  would  not  give  up  their 
press  bureau,  the  newspaper  proprietors  joined  in  the 
agitation  for  the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs.^ 

As  soon  as  the  Government  began  to  negotiate  with 
the  telegraph  companies  for  the  purchase  of  their 
plants,  the  newspaper  proprietors  organized  a  com- 
mittee to  protect  their  interests  and  to  represent  them 
before  the  Select  Committee  to  which  had  been  referred 
the  Electric  Telegraphs  Bill  of  1868.  That  Bill  had 
said  that  the  tariff  was  to  be  uniform,  irrespective  of 
distance,  and  was  not  to  exceed  24  cents  for  20  words, 
address  not  to  be  counted.  It  had  said  nothing  on  the 
subject  of  the  tariff  to  be  charged  to  the  newspaper 
press. 

On  May  15,  1868,  Mr.  Scudamore  had  written  the 
Committee  of  the  newspaper  proprietors :  "As  a  matter 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  OfUce  {Tele- 
graph Department),  1876,  C.  H.  B.  Patey,  Principal  Clerk  in  the 
Post  Office  Department ;  q.  4,900  and  4,901. 

^  Special  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Electric  Tele- 
graphs Bill,  1868 :  J.  E.  Taylor,  Proprietor  of  the  Manchester  Guard- 
ian; Wm.  Saunders,  Proprietor  of  the  Western  Morning  News; 
Dr.  Cameron,  Proprietor  of  the  North  British  Daily  Mail ;  and  F.  D, 
Finlay,  Proprietor  of  the  Northern  Whig. 


116  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

of  course  the  Post  Office  would  not  undertake  to  collect 
news  any  more  than  it  would  undertake  to  write  letters 
for  the  public,  but  the  news  being  collected,  it  could, 
and  I  submit,  ought,  to  transmit  it  at  rates  at  least  as 
low  as  those  now  charged,  and  which  though  they  are 
unquestionably  low,  are  still  believed  to  yield  the  com- 
panies a  considerable  profit It  seems  to  me,  in- 
deed, that  the  transmission  of  news  to  the  press 
throughout  the  United  Kingdom  should  be  regarded 
as  a  matter  of  national  importance  and  that  the  charge 
of  such  transmission  should  include  no  greater  margin 
of  profit  than  would  suffice  to  make  the  service  fairly 
self-supporting."^ 

Thereupon  the  newspaper  proprietors  demanded  : 
"That  the  maximum  rate  for  the  transmission  of  tele- 
graphic messages  [for  newspapers]  should  not  exceed 
that  which  is  now  paid  by  each  individual  proprietor 
[as  a  subscriber  to  the  companies'  press  bureau] ,  which 
is,  for  transmission,  exclusive  of  the  cost  of  collection, 
4  cents  per  loo  words.  "^  This  demand  assumed  that 
the  companies'  charge  of  8  cents  per  lOO  words  was 
remunerative;  that  it  was  made  up  of  two  separable 
parts:  a  charge  for  transmission,  and  a  charge  for 
collecting  and  editing ;  and  that  the  charge  ascribed  to 


*  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  OMce  (Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  J.  E.  Taylor,  Proprietor  of  the  Manchester 
Guardian;  q.  3,854  to  3,862. 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  OfRce  {Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  G.  Harper,  Editor  HuddersHeld  Chronicle,  and 
representative  of  the  Provincial  Newspaper  Society,  which  embraced 
about  300  newspapers. 


STATE  TELEGRAPHS  SUBSIDIZE  THE  PRESS   117 

transmission  still  would  remain  remunerative  even 
after  the  charge  ascribed  to  collecting  and  editing  had 
been  withdrawn.  Upon  none  of  these  several  points 
were  the  officers  of  the  telegraph  companies  asked  to 
testify,  the  statements  of  the  newspaper  proprietors 
being  allowed  to  stand  unsupported. 

In  order  to  insure  the  payment  of  an  average  sum  of 
4  cents  or  5  cents  per  100  words,  the  newspaper  pro- 
prietors proposed  that  messages  be  transmitted  for  the 
newspapers  "at  rates  not  exceeding  24  cents  for  every 
100  words  transmitted  at  night,  and  at  rates  not  ex- 
ceeding 24  cents  for  every  75  words  transmitted  by 
day,  to  a  single  address,  with  an  additional  charge  of 
4  cents  for  every  100  words,  or  for  every  75  words,  as 
the  case  may  be,  of  the  same  telegram  so  transmitted 
to  every  additional  address."  By  way  of  compromise, 
Mr.  Scudamore  proposed  a  charge  of  24  cents  for  75 
words  or  100  words  for  each  separate  town  to  which 
Mr.  Scudamore  ^^^^  message  might  be  sent,  and  the 
yields  to  the  limitation  of  the  4  cent  copy  rate  to 
newspapers  copies  delivered  by  hand  in  the  same 

town.  Mr.  Scudamore,  however,  withdrew  that  pro- 
posal, and  accepted  the  proposition  of  the  newspaper 
proprietors,  which  became  the  law.  It  is  needless  to 
add  that  the  opposition  of  the  newspaper  press  to  the 
Bill  of  1868  would  have  delayed  the  passage  of  that 
Bill  even  more  than  any  opposition  on  the  part  of  the 
telegraph  companies  and  railway  companies  could  have 
done.  Indeed,  it  is  probable,  that  the  newspaper  press 
could  have  defeated  the  Bill. 


118  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

In  1875  the  Treasury  appointed  a  ''Committee  to  in- 
vestigate the  Causes  of  the  Increased  Cost  of  the  Tele- 
graphic Service  since  the  Acquisition  of  the  Telegraphs 
by  the  State/'  That  committee  consisted  of  three 
prominent  officers  taken  from  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment and  other  departments  of  State.  Upon  the  news- 
paper tariff  fixed  by  the  Act  of  1868,  the  Committee 
reported :  "The  consequences  of  such  a  system  must  be 
obvious  to  every  one.  Even  at  ordinary  times  the 
wires  are  always  largely  occupied  with  press  work,  and 
at  extraordinary  times  they  are  absolutely  flooded  with 
this  most  unremunerative  traffic,  which  not  only  fills 
the  wires  unduly  to  the  exclusion  of  better  paying  mat- 
ter, but  necessitates  a  much  larger  staff  than  would  be 
necessary  with  a  more  reasonable  system  [of  charges]  } 
After  very  careful  consideration  of  these  points,  Mr. 
Weaver  [one  of  the  members  of  the  committee,  and 
the  former  Secretary  of  the  Electric  and  International 
Telegraph  Company],  has  no  hesitation  in  expressing 
his  opinion  that  the  principle  of  the  stipulations  of  the 
tariff  authorized  by  the  Telegraph  Act,  1868,  both  as 
regards  messages  transmitted  for  the  public,  and  those 
forwarded  for  the  press,  is  essentially  unsound,  and 
has  been  the  main  cause  of  the  large  percentage  of 
expenditure  as  compared  with  the  gross  revenue.     In 

*  Compare :  Report  by  Mr.  Scudamore  on  the  Re-organisation  of 
the  Telegraph  System  of  the  United  Kingdom,  1871,  pp.  31  and  32. 
Daily  number  of  words  transmitted  for  the  newspapers: 

Parliament  Parliament 

in  session  not  in  session 

1868 6,000  4,000 

1870 20,000  15,000 


STATE  TELEGRAPHS  SUBSIDIZE  THE  PRESS    119 

order  to  provide  for  the  prompt  and  efficient  trans- 
mission of  the  vast  amount  of  matter  produced  by  such 
a  system,  a  considerable  extension  of  plant  was  neces- 
sary, involving  a  large  original  cost,  besides  a  regular 
yearly  outlay  for  maintenance  and  renewal,  and  not 
only  so,  but  a  large  and  constantly  increasing  staff  had 
to  be  provided  to  work  lines,  which,  if  taken  separately, 
would  not  be  found  to  produce  anything  approaching  to 
the  cost  entailed  for  erecting,  working,  and  maintain- 
ing 'them.  It  will  be  obvious,  therefore,  that,  unless  a 
retrograde  step  be  taken  in  order  to  amend  the  prin- 
ciples upon  which  the  stipulations  of  the  tariff  are  made 
up,  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  expect  that  the  revenue 
derived  for  telegraph  messages  under  the  present  sys- 
tem can  ever  be  made  to  cover  the  expenses  of  work- 
ing, the  interest  upon  capital,  and  the  ultimate  extinc- 
tion of  the  debt."i 

In  May,  1876,  Mr.  C.  H.  B.  Patey,  Principal  Clerk 
in  the  Post  Office  Department,  testified  that  the  Post 
Office  was  losing  $100,000  a  year  by  transmitting 
220,000,000  words  for  the  newspaper  press  at  an  aver- 
age price  of  8  cents  per  100  words.  Mr.  Patey  said 
180,000,000  words  were  being  carried  at  the  rate  of 
4  cents  per  100  words,  or  for  $74,180  in  the  aggre- 
gate; and  40,000,000  were  being  transmitted  at  the 


^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  OfUce  (Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  J.  E.  Taylor,  Proprietor  of  the  Manchester 
Guardian;  q.  3,854  and  3,900;  and  G.  Harper,  Editor  HuddersHeld 
Daily  Chronicle,  and  Representative  of  the  Provincial  Newspaper 
Society;  q.  4,157  to  4,162. 


120  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

rate  of  24  cents  per  100  words,  or,  for  $109,795  i^^  the 
aggregate.^  Mr.  Patey  submitted  no  calculations  in 
support  of  his  statement  that  there  had  been  a  loss  of 
$100,000  on  newspaper  messages  yielding  $183,975. 
But  he  cited  two  illustrations  from  Hull  and  the  Not- 
tingham-Sheffield-Leeds-Bradford group  of  towns.  He 
stated  that  the  Post  Office  received  $1,600  a  year  for 
messages  transmitted  to  six  newspapers  in  Hull,  and 
spent  $5,275  on  the  transmission  of  those  messages. 
He  added  that  the  service  supplied  to  nineteen  towns 
included  in  the  Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds-Bradford 
group  of  towns  yielded  $21,760,  and  cost  the  Post 
Office  $38,270.2 

In  1876,  the  Postmaster  General,  through  Mr.  S.  A. 
Blackwood,  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office,^ 
asked  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  Office  (Tele- 
graph Department)  to  recommend  to  Parliament  that 
the  tariff  on  newspaper  press  messages  be  made  "24 
cents  for  75  words  or  100  words  for  each  separate  town 
to  which  each  message  may  be  sent,  and  that  the  4 
cent  copy  rate  be  limited  to  copies  delivered  by  hand 
in  the  same  town."  That,  it  will  be  remembered,  was 
the  proposal  made  and  withdrawn  in  1868  by  Mr. 
Scudamore.     The  Select  Committee  recommended  that 

*  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  OMce  {Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  5,057  to  5,074,  3,360,  3,377,  3,383,  and  4,934 
to  4,942 ;  and  Jno.  Lovell,  Manager  of  The  Press  Association ;  q. 
3,979  to  3,986. 

'^  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  OfRce  {Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  5,122  to  5,129. 

*  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  OMce  {Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  5,278. 


STATE  TELEGRAPHS  SUBSIDIZE  THE  PRESS    121 

the  amount  of  the  loss  on  the  newspaper  press  messages 
be  clearly  ascertained,  and  that  the  copy  rates  be  raised 
sufficiently  to  cover  that  loss.  But  Parliament  failed 
to  act  on  the  recommendation. 

Mr.  Patey  had  supported  Mr.  Blackwood's  request 
with  the  statement,  based  upon  inquiry  of  postmasters 
throughout  the  United  Kingdom,  that  "in  a  very  large 
number  of  towns  only  a  small  part  of  the  telegraphic 
news  transmitted  was  inserted  in  the  newspapers.  In 
many  cases,  on  inquiry  of  the  proprietors,  it  was  stated 
that  it  was  not  inserted  inasmuch  as  it  was  not  of  in- 
terest to  the  readers.  In  other  cases,  because  the 
amount  of  local  news  was  more  than  would  admit  of 
the  special  telegraphic  news  being  inserted."  Mr. 
Patey  also  had  quoted  from  a  recent  issue  of  the  Glas- 
gow Herald  the  statement,  that  "there  was  not  a  lead- 
ing provincial  paper  in  the  Kingdom,  the  sub-editorial 
room  of  which  was  not  littered  in  the  small  hours  of 
the  morning  ankle  deep  with  rejected  telegraph  flimsy ;" 
and  from  a  recent  issue  of  the  Freeman's  Journal: 
"The  fact  is,  that  the  Post  Office,  and  the  better  class  of 
papers  as  well,  are  both  over-pressed  with  these  cheap 
duplicate  telegrams.  We  suppose  we  pay  for  about 
ten  times  as  many  as  we  print.  Though  we  get  them, 
and  pay  for  them,  so  as  to  insure  having  the  best  news 
from  every  quarter,  we  regard  them  rather  as  a  nui- 
sance, and  would  be  glad  to  have  them  reduced  in 
quantity."  And  finally,  Mr.  Patey  had  argued  that 
the  newspaper  press  was  able  to  pay  much  more  than 


122  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

it  did  pay,  "inasmuch  as  there  had  been  a  tendency  on 
the  part  of  the  papers  generally,  not  confined  only  to 
the  large  papers,"  to  get  their  news  by  special  messages 
prepared  by  their  own  agents  and  not  sent  in  duplicate 
to  any  extent.^ 

Before  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Revenue  De- 
partments Estimates,  1888,  Mr.  C.  H.  B.  Patey,  Third 
Secretary  to  the  Post  Office,  stated :  "We  believe  that 
the  tariff  under  which  the  press  messages  are  sent  in 
this  country  causes  a  loss  amounting  to  nearly  $1,000,- 
000  a  year.  "2  in  August,  1888,  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, Mr.  Cochrane-Baillie  asked  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral "whether  in  view  of  the  Report  of  the  Committee 
on  the  Revenue  Departments  Estimates,  he  could  state 
that  the  Government  would  bring  in  further  legisla- 
tion to  relieve  the  country  from  the  loss  incurred  by 
the  present  arrangement  in  connection  with  press  tele- 
grams?" The  Postmaster  General  replied  that  "he 
was  quite  in  accord  with  the  Committee  on  Revenue 
Departments  but  he  feared  it  would  be  difficult  to 
effect  any  change,  since  the  newspaper  press  tariff  was 

"^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  Office  {Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  3.385  and  following,  4,926,  4,927,  3,371.  and 
3,372. 

Receipts  from  messages  sent  to  individual  newspapers,  and  not 
duplicated  to  any  extent: 

$ 

1870 29,000 

1871 41,000 

1872 60,000 

1873 78,000 

1874 85,000 

1875 91,000 

'Questions  2,007  and  2,167. 


STATE  TELEGRAPHS  SUBSIDIZE  THE  PRESS   123 

fixed  by  the  Act  of  1868,  and  had  been  in  force  for 
upward  of  eighteen  years. "^ 

In  November,  1893,  ^^-  Arnold  Morley,  Postmas- 
ter General,  stated  in  the  House  of  Commons  that  "the 
best  estimate  that  can  be  formed  by  the  officials  at  the 
Post  Office  points  to  the  loss  on  the  newspaper  press 
telegrams  being  at  least  $1,500,000  a  year;  and  it 
probably  is  still  more."^  In  April,  1895,  Mr.  Arnold 
Morley,  Postmaster  General,  repeated  the  foregoing 
statement,  and  "maintained  it  in  spite  of  various  state- 
ments to  the  contrary  in  the  newspapers."     He  added: 

"and  I  should  be  quite  willing  to  ar- 
Annual  loss  on  .        . 

Newspaper  Mes-    range    for    an    impartial    investigation 

sages  estimated      such  as  is  suggested  by  the  Right  Hon- 

at  $1,500,000  11     A-      ^1  -r  T 

orable  Gentleman,  if  1  were  to  receive 

satisfactory  assurances  that  the  press  w^ould  abide  by 
the  result  of  an  inquiry,  and  would  undertake  not  to 
oppose  the  passage  of  the  necessary  legislation  for  a 
corresponding  revision  in  the  charges,  if  it  should  be 
shown  that  they  are  insufficient  to  provide  for  the  cost 
of  the  service."^  The  assurances  were  not  forthcom- 
ing; and  the  newspaper  press  tariff  remained  un- 
changed. 

In  April,  1900,  Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  Financial  Sec- 
retary to  the  Treasury,  and  representative  in  the  House 
of  Commons  of  the  Postmaster  General,  a  member  of 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  30,   1888,  p.  305. 
"Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  November  27,  1893,  p.  1,789. 
Compare  also  June  19,  1893,  p.  1,316. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  4,  1895,  p.  919. 


124 


THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 


the  House  of  Lords,  said :  "The  penny  postage  realizes 
an  enormous  revenue  and  brings  in  a  profit,  but  every 
other  part  of  the  Post  Office  work  is  carried  on  at  a 
loss.     The  whole  profit  is  on  the  penny  letter."^ 


The  Telegraph  Act  of  1868  provided  that  news- 
paper rates  should  be  given  to  "the  proprietor  or  occu- 
pier of  any  news  room,  club,  or  exchange  room."^ 
The  clubs  or  exchange  rooms  in  question  are  largely 
what  we  should  term  "pool  rooms,"  places  maintained 
Betting  on  ^^^  ^^^  purpose  of  affording  the  public 

facilities  for  betting  on  horse  races.^ 
In  1876  Mr.  Saunders,  proprietor  of 
the  Central  News  Press  Association,  testified  that  his 
association  would  send  in  the  course  of  a  day  to  the 
same  list  of  addressees  the  results  of  a  number  of  races. 


Horse  Races 
subsidised 


^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  27,  1900,  p.  136. 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  Office  (Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  3,360  to  3,370,  3»423.  4>9^7  to  4»923.  and  5,147 
to  5,149. 

'  Report  by  Mr.  Scudamore  on  the  Re-organization  of  the  Tele- 
graph System  of  the  United  Kingdom,  1871,  pp.  31  and  32;  and 
Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Revenue  Departments  Esti- 
mates, 1888 ;  Mr.  C.  H.  B.  Patey,  Third  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office, 
in  Appendix  No.  14. 


Towns 

News- 

papers 

144 

173 

36s 

467 

326 

52s 

371 

578 

286 

499 

Newsrooms 
and  Clubs 
(pool-rooms) 


Messages 
Delivered 


Words 
Delivered 


1869 

1871 

1881 

1885.... 
1887.... 


133 
639 
278 
397 
289 


2,735,042 
3,616,653 
4,289,986 


21,702,000 
327,707,400 
421,362,579 
481,796,400 


STATE  TELEGRAPHS  SUBSIDIZE  THE  PRESS   125 

The  words  in  the  several  messages  might  not  aggre- 
gate 75  words,  and  thus  his  association  would  be 
charged  for  the  transmission  of  one  message  only.  In 
that  way  a  number  of  messages  would  be  transmitted 
'^gratuitously."  Mr.  Saunders  added  that,  in  1875, 
the  Post  Office  had  transmitted  gratuitously  for  his 
association  446,000  sporting  messages.  Mr.  Patey, 
Third  Clerk  in  the  Post  Office,  added  that  while  the 
Post  Office  received  4  cents  for  transmitting  from  8  to 
10  sporting  messages,  it  had  to  make  8  to  10  separate 
deliveries,  by  messenger  boy,  on  account  of  those  mes- 
sages which  were  counted  as  one;  and  that  each  such 
delivery  cost  the  Post  Office  on  an  average  two  cents. 
Thus,  on  a  recent  date,  the  Post  Office  had  delivered 
the  results  of  the  Lichfield  races  to  205  addressees  by 
means  of  1,640  separate  deliveries,  and  had  received 
for  the  service,  on  an  average,  one-half  a  cent  per  sepa- 
rate message.^ 

In  January,  1876,  the  Post  Office  discontinued  the 
"continuous  counting"  of  sporting  messages.^  It  took 
the  Department  six  years  to  summon  the  courage  to 
make  this  change  whereby  was  effected  some  diminu- 
tion of  the  burden  cast  upon  the  general  body  of  tax- 
payers for  the  benefit  of  the  sporting  element  among 
the  voters  of  the  United  Kingdom. 


''^  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Post  OMce  {Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  4,047  to  4,051,  4»889,  4,890  and  3,343- 

^Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  196,  Session  of  1877;  Copy  of  the 
Regulations  Relating  to  Press  Telegraph  Messages  issued  by  the 
Postmaster  General  in  1876. 


126  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

It  would  seem,  however,  that  the  practice  of  "con- 
tinuous counting"  had  been  resumed  at  some  subsequent 
date.  For,  in  March,  1906,  in  reply  to  a  question  from 
Mr.  Sloan,  M.  P.,  the  Postmaster  General,  Mr.  Sydney 
Buxton,  said :  "Clubs  are,  under  section  16  of  the  Tele- 
graph Act  of  1868,  entitled  to  the  benefit  of  the  very 
low  telegraph  rates  accorded  to  press  messages;  and  I 
have  no  power  to  discriminate  against  a  legitimate 
club  because  it  is  used  for  betting  purposes.  I  propose 
to  consider  whether  the  section  ought  not  to  be  amended 
in  certain  respects."^ 

On  December  31,  1875,  ^^^  IPost  Office  discontinued 
entirely  the  practice — voluntarily  assumed — of  trans- 
mitting sporting  messages  to  so-called  hotels,  in  reality 
saloons.  The  waste  of  the  public  funds  that  the  Post 
Office  had  incurred  in  response  to  pressure  from  the 
publicans,  is  illustrated  in  Mr.  Patey's  statement  that 
the  Post  Office  had  received  from  a  certain  Liverpool 
hotel  $0.82  a  week  for  messages  which  had  entailed  a 
weekly  expenditure  of  $2.50  for  messenger  service 
alone. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  12,  1906,  p.  867. 


I 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  POST  OFFICE  EMPLOYEES  PRESS  THE  HOUSE 

OF   COMMONS   FOR   INCREASES   OF   WAGES 

AND  SALARIES 

British  Government's  policy  as  to  wages  and  salaries  for 
routine  work,  as  distinguished  from  work  requiring  a  high  order 
of  intelligence.  The  Fawcett  revision  of  wages,  1881.  Lord 
Frederick  Cavendish,  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  on 
pressure  exerted  on  Members  of  Parliament  by  the  telegraph 
employees.  Sir  S.  A.  Blackwood,  Permanent  Secretary  to  the 
Post  Office,  on  the  Fawcett  revision  of  1881.  Evidence  as  to 
civil  servants'  pressure  on  Members  of  Parliament  presented  to 
the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establishments,  1888.  The  Raikes 
revision  of  1890-91 ;  based  largely  on  the  Report  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  the  Indoor  Staff,  which  Committee  had  recommended 
increases  in  order  "to  end  agitation."  The  Earl  Compton,  M.  P., 
champions  the  cause  of  the  postal  employees  in  1890;  and  moves 
for  a  Select  Committee  in  1891.  Sir  James  Fergusson,  Post- 
master General  in  the  Salisbury  Ministry,  issues  an  order  against 
Post  Office  servants  "endeavoring  to  extract  promises  from  any 
candidate  for  election  to  the  House  of  Commons  with  reference 
to  their  pay  or  duties."  The  Gladstone  Ministry  rescinds  Sir 
James  Fergusson's  order.  Mr.  Macdonald's  Motion,  in  1893,  for 
a  House  of  Commons  Select  Committee.  Mr.  Kearley's  Motion, 
in  1895.  The  Government  compromises,  and  appoints  the  so- 
called  Tweedmouth  Inter-Departmental  Committee. 

At  the  time  of  the  transfer  of  the  telegraphs  to  the 
State,  February,  1870,  the  average  weekly  wages  paid 
by  the  telegraph  companies  to  the  telegraphists  in  the 

127 


128  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

seven  largest  cities  of  the  United  Kingdom,  was  $5.14 
for  the  male  staff,  and  $3.56  for  the  female  staff.  That 
average  for  the  male  staff  includes  the  salaries  of  the 
supervisors;  if  the  latter  be  excluded,  the  average  for 
the  rank  and  file  of  the  male  employees  will  fall  to 
$4.80.^  In  1872,  two  years  after  the  transfer,  the 
average  wage  of  the  male  telegraphists  in  the  offices  of 
Metropolitan  London  was  $6.56,  while  the  average 
wage  of  the  female  clerks  was  $4.30.  For  the  United 
Kingdom  exclusive  of  London,  the  average  wage  of 
the  telegraphists  was  $5.46  for  the  male  employees,  and 
$4.50  for  the  female  employ ees.^  The  latter  averages 
record  a  larger  increase  of  wages  in  the  period  1870 
to  1872,  than  would  appear  at  first  blush  upon  com- 
parison with  the  average  of  1870,  namely :  $4.80  for 
men  telegraphists  and  $3.56  for  women  telegraphists. 
For  while  the  figures  for  1872  record  the  averages  for 
the  whole  United  Kingdom  exclusive  of  London,  those 
for  1870  record  the  averages  of  the  seven  largest  cities 
only. 

The  increases  in  wages  and  salaries  in  the  years 
1870  to  1872  were  due  mainly  to  the  all  round  rise  in 
wages  and  salaries  that  occurred  in  the  United  King- 
dom in  the  period  from  1868  to  1872.  In  the  case  of 
the  telegraphists  the  rise  in  wages  was  postponed  until 


^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  15,119;  Mr.  Lewin  Hill,  Assistant  Secretary, 
General  Post  Office,  London. 

'Return  to  an  Order  of  the  Honorable,  The  House  of  Com' 
mons,  dated  March  16th,  1898. 


i 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  129 

1870  to  1872,  for  the  reason  that  the  telegraph  com- 
panies, as  much  as  possible,  adhered  to  the  past  scale 
of  wages  and  salaries  on  account  of  the  pending  trans- 
fer of  their  properties  to  the  State.^  The  companies 
were  able  to  pursue  the  policy  in  question  by-  refrain^ 
ing  from  increasing  their  forces  materially,  working 
their  old  staff  over  time.  In  part,  however,  the  in- 
crease in  the  wages  of  the  telegraphists  after  the  trans- 
fer of  the  telegraphs  to  the  Post  Office  was  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  Government  was  obliged  to  pay  the  em- 
ployees in  the  Telegraph  Department  something  more 
than  the  rates  of  wages  prevailing  in  the  open  market. 
For,  previous  to  the  acquisition  of  the  telegraphs,  the 
Government  had  established  the  policy  of  paying  its 
employees  more  than  the  open  market  rate  for  work 
requiring  only  fidelity  and  diligence  in  the  perform- 
ances of  routine  duty,  as  distinguished  from  work  re- 
quiring a  high  order  of  intelligence  and  discretion. 
Shortly  after  the  Post  Office  had  acquired  the  tele- 
graphs, it  was  compelled  to  extend  the  aforesaid  policy 
to  the  new  body  of  State  employees.  As  a  matter  of 
everyday  politics,  it  proved  impossible  for  the  Govern- 
ment to  discriminate  between  the  several  classes  of 
public   servants,   paying  one  part   of   them   "fancy" 


^Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  34,  Session  of  1876,  Lord  John  Man- 
ners, Postmaster  General ;  and  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental 
Committee  on  Post  Office  Establishments,  1897,  Mr.  L.  Hill,  Assistant 
Secretary,  General  Post  Office,  London ;  Appendix,  pp.  1,095  and 
1,099. 


130  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

wages,  and  the  rest  of  them  wages  determined  by  de- 
mand and  supply.^ 

An  episode  from  the  reorganization  of  the  Civil  Serv- 
ice in  1876,  in  accordance  with  the  recommendation 
of  the  so-called  Playfair  Commission,  affords  insight 
into  the  British  practice  of  paying  the  public  servants 
something  more  than  the  market  rate  of  wages  and 
salaries.  The  Playfair  Commission  had  recommended 
that  the  pay  of  the  lower  division  of  Government 
clerks  begin  with  $325,  and  rise  by  annual  increments 
to  $1,000,  for  seven  hours'  work  a  day.  Thereupon 
the  Government  had  fixed  the  rate  at  $400,  to  rise  by 
annual  increments  to  $1,000.  The  Playfair  Commis- 
sion had  stated  that  if  it  had  been  guided  by  the  "volu- 
minous" evidence  which  it  had  taken,  it  would  have 
fixed  at  $750,  the  maximum  to  which  should  rise  the 
salaries  of  the  lower  division  clerks.  But  it  had  de- 
sired to  attract  "the  elite"  of  the  classes  that  the  Gov- 
ernment could  draw  from,  and  therefore  it  had  fixed 
the  maximum  at  $1,000.^ 

In  August,  1 88 1,  the  House  of  Commons  accepted 

^Report  of  a  Committee  Appointed  by  the  Treasury  to  investi- 
gate the  Causes  of  the  Increased  Cost  of  the  Telegraph  Service  since 
the  Acquisition  of  the  Telegraphs  hy  the  State,  1875,  p.  5;  Pirst 
Report  of  the  Civil  Service  Inquiry  Commission,  1875,  p.  9;  and 
Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Post  OMce  (Telegraph  De- 
partment), 1876;  Mr.  E.  Graves,  Divisional  Engineer;  q.  1,566  and 
following. 

'  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 
ments, 1888;  Sir  Lyon  Playfair;  q.  20,124  to  20,194;  Sir  Reginald 
E.  Welby,  Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  10,557  to  10,560; 
and  Appendix,  p.  570  and  following. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  131 

the  proposal  of  Mr.  Fawcett,  Postmaster  General,  to 
increase  the  pay  of  the  telegraph  operators,  to  count 
seven  hours  of  night  attendance  a  day's  work,  and  to 
Fawcett  Revision  grant  various  other  minor  concessions.^ 
of  Wages,  1881  Those  several  changes  raised  the  aveiS 
age  sum  spent  for  salaries  and  v^ages  in  the  transmis- 
sion of  a  telegraphic  message,  from  11.70  cents  in 
1880-81,  to  13.72  cents  in  1884-85.2  Mr.  Fawcett 
stated  in  the  House  of  Commons  that  inquiry  of  "lead- 
ing employees  of  labor,  such  as  bankers,  railway  com- 
panies, manufacturers,  and  others"  had  led  him  to  con- 
clude that  the  telegraph  operators  were  underpaid.  He 
also  mentioned  the  fact  that  while  he  was  considering 
the  arguments  that  the  telegraphists  had  made  before 
him  in  support  of  the  proposition  that  their  pay  was 
inadequate,  "outside  influence"  was  brought  to  bear 
repeatedly  upon  the  telegraphists,  and  that  the  afore- 
said outside  influence  "went  so  far  as  to  recommend 
the  employees  to  resort  to  the  last  extremity  of  a 
strike."^ 

Mr.  Maclver  replied  that  "he  wished  to  say  a  word 
with  regard  to  the  imputation  contained  in  the  state- 
ment of  the  Right  Honorable  Gentleman,  that  he  [Mr. 
Maclver]  had  exercised  outside  influence  upon  the 
telegraphists.     In  common  with  other  members  of  the 

'^Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  286,  Session  of  1881. 

^  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Revenue  Departments 
Estimates,  1888;  Appendix  No.  12,  Mr.  C.  H.  B.  Patey,  Third  Secre- 
tary to  the  Post  Office. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  16,  1881,  p.  128. 


132  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

House,  he  had  heard^  the  complaints  of  the  telegraph- 
ists, and  had  thought  it  his  duty  to  bring  complaints 
before  the  House  and  the  Right  Honorable  Gentleman, 
the  Postmaster  General,  so  that,  if  he  had  erred,  he  had 
erred  in  common  with  many  others." 

In  the  course  of  the  debate  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, Lord  Frederick  Cavendish,  Financial  Secretary 
to  the  Treasury,  said :  "With  respect  to  the  telegraph 
clerks,  since  they  had  received  the  franchise,  they  had 
used  it  to  apply  pressure  to  Members  of  Parliament 
for  the  furtherance  of  their  own  objects If,  in- 
stead of  the  Executive  being  responsible,  Members  of 
the  House  were  to  conduct  the  administration  of  the 
The  Treasurv  departments,  there  would  be  an  end  of 
on  Civil  Service  all  responsibility  whatever.  In  the  same 
Pressure  ^^^^  j£  ^^le  Treasury  was  not  to  have 
control  over  expenditure,  and  Members  of  the  House 
were  to  become  promotors  of  it,  the  system  [of  admin- 
istering the  national  finances]   which  had  worked  so 

admirably  in  the  past  would  be  at  an  end With 

regard  to  the  position  of  the  telegraphists  in  the  Gov- 
ernment Service  as  compared  with  their  former  posi- 
tion under  private  companies,  what  had  taken  place 
would  be  a  warning  to  the  Government  to  be  careful 
against  unduly  extending  the  sphere  of  their  operations 
by  entering  every  day  upon  some  new  field,  and  plac- 
ing themselves  at  a  disadvantage  by  undertaking  the 
work  of  private  persons.     He   pointed  out  that  the 

^  That  is,  he  had  given  the  telegraphists  an  interview. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  133 

Government  Service  was  always  more  highly  paid 
than  that  of  the  companies  and  private  persons,  and 
in  the  particular  case  of  the  telegraph  clerks  [operators] 
the  men  themselves  received  higher  pay  than  they  had 
before.  "1 

Before  the  Postmaster  General  had  introduced  into 
Parliament  his  scheme  for  improving  the  positions  of 
the  telegraphists,  sorting  clerks  and  postmen,^  Lord 
Frederick  Cavendish,  in  his  position  as  Financial  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury,^  had  written  the  Postmaster 
General  as  follows :  ....  "Admitting,  as  my  Lords 
[of  the  Treasury]  do,  that  when  discontent  is  shown 
to  prevail  extensively  in  any  branch  of  the  Public  Serv- 
ice, it  calls  for  attention  and  inquiry,  and,  so  far  as  it 
is  proved  to  be  well  founded,  for  redress,  they  are  not 
prepared  to  acquiesce  in  any  organized  agitation  which 
openly  seeks  to  bring  its  extensive  voting  power  to 
bear  on  the  House  of  Commons  against  the  Executive 
Government  responsible  for  conducting  in  detail  the 
administration  of  the  country.  The  persons  who  are 
affected  by  the  change  now  proposed  are,  as  you  ob- 
serve, no  fewer  than  10,000,  and  the  entire  postal 
service  numbers  nearly  five  times  as  many.  Other 
branches  of  the  Civil  Service  employed  and  voting  in 
various  parts  of  the  United  Kingdom,  are  at  least  as 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  16,  1881,  p.  141. 

^  The  narrative  ignores  the  parts  of  the  scheme  affecting  the 
letter  carriers  and  letter  sorters. 

'  For  an  account  of  the  organization  and  the  duties  of  the 
Treasury,  as  well  as  of  the  position  and  the  duties  of  the  Financial 
Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  see  Chapter  XVII. 


134  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

numerous  in  the  aggregate  as  the  servants  of  the  Post 
Office.  All  this  vast  number  of  persons,  not  living 
like  soldiers  and  sailors  outside  ordinary  civil  life  are 
individually  and  collectively  interested  in  using  their 
votes  to  increase,  in  their  own  favor,  the  public  ex- 
penditure, which  the  rest  of  the  community,  who  have 
to  gain  their  living  in  the  unrestricted  competition  of 
the  open  market,  must  provide  by  taxation,  if  it  is  pro- 
vided at  all.  My  Lords  therefore  reserve  to  them- 
selves the  power  of  directing  that  the  execution  of  the 
terms  agreed  to  in  the  preceding  part  of  the  letter  be 
suspended  in  any  post  office  of  which  the  members  are 
henceforth  known  to  be  taking  part  in  extra-official 
agitation.  They  understand  that  you  are  inquiring 
whether  the  law,  as  declared  in  the  existing  Post  Office 
Acts,  does  not  afford  to  the  public  similar  protection 
in  respect  of  postal  communication,  including  tele- 
graphs, as  is  afforded  by  the  Act  38  and  39  Victoria, 
c.  86,  s.  4,  to  municipal  authorities  and  other  contract- 
ors, against  breaches  of  contracts  of  service  in  respect 
of  gas  or  water,  the  wilful  interruption  to  the  use  of 
which  [by  means  of  a  strike]  is  hardly  of  more  serious 
import  to  the  local  community  than  is  that  of  postal 
communications  to  the  national  community.  If  the 
existing  Post  Office  Acts  do  not  meet  this  case,  it  will 
be  for  my  Lords  to  consider  whether  the  circumstances 
continue  to  be  such  as  to  make  it  their  duty  to  propose 
to  Parliament  an  extension  to  the  Post  Office  of  pro- 
visions similar  to  those  cited  above  from  the  Act  38  and 
39  Victoria,  c.  86,  s.  4."^ 

^Parliamentary  Paper,  No.  286,  Session  of   1881. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  135 

In  June,  1882,  Mr.  Fawcett,  Postmaster  General, 
said  in  the  House  of  Commons:  "The  House  would 
remember  how,  last  session,  he  was  pressed  by  honor- 
able Members  on  both  sides  of  the  House  to  increase 
the  pay  of  the  telegraph  employees ....  in  spite  of 
all  that  was  done  for  the  telegraph  employees,  he 
noticed  that  they  were  constantly  saying  that  what 
they  received  was  worse  than  nothing.  All  he  could 
say  was  that  if  $400,000^  a  year  out  of  public  funds 
was  worse  than  nothing,  he,  for  one,  deeply  regretted 
that  that  sacrifice  of  public  money  was  ever  made."^  In 
March,  1883,  M^-  Fawcett,  Postmaster  General,  said: 
"The  salaries  of  the  telegraph  employees  have — I  will 
not  say  by  the  pressure  of  the  House,  but  certainly 
with  the  approval  of  the  House — been  increased  [in 
1881].  I  do  not  regret  that  increase;  I  think  the  ex- 
tra pay  they  receive  was  due  to  them,  and  if  I  had  not 
thought  so,  no  number  of  memorials  would  have  in- 
duced me  to  recommend  the  Treasury  to  make  such  a 
large  sacrifice  of  revenue."^  In  April,  1884,  Mr.  Faw- 
cett, Postmaster  General,  said :  "$750,000  a  year  has 
been  spent  [of  late]  in  improving  the  position  of  the 
telegraphists  and  letter  sorters,  and  I  say  there  never 

^In  consequence  of  the  fact  that  wages  and  salaries  rise  by 
annual  increments  from  the  minimum  to  the  maximum,  some  years 
must  elapse  before  the  full  effect  of  the  increase  in  pay  granted  in 
1 88 1  would  be  felt.  It  was  assumed  that  in  the  first  year  the  total 
increase  in  expenditure  would  be  $85,000,  and  that  ultimately  it 
would  be  $700,000.  In  that  connection  it  was  common  to  speak  of 
a  mean  increase  of  $450,000. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  26,  1882,  p.  429  and  431. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  29,  1883,  p.  i,oi6. 


136  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

was  an  expenditure  of  public  money  which  was  more 
justifiable  than  that.  If  we  had  yielded  to  mere  popu- 
lar demands  and  thrown  away  the  money  we  should 
deserve  the  severest  censure;  but  I  believe  that  if  an 
increase  of  wages  had  not  been  conceded,  it  would  have 
been  impossible  to  carry  on  the  administration  of  the 
Department ;  and  I  think  there  is  no  economy  so  unwise 
as  refusing  to  increase  remuneration  when  you  arfe 
convinced  that  the  circumstances  of  the  case  demand 
the  increase."^ 

In  July,  1888,  the  following  questions  and  answers 
passed  between  the  Chairman  of  the  Select  Committee 
on  Revenue  Departments  Estimates,  and  Sir  S.  A. 
Blackwood,  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office.  "With  re- 
spect to  the  increase  of  salaries  at  the  time  when  Mr. 
Fawcett  was  Postmaster  General,  I  presume  that  those 
recommendations  of  his  were  founded  upon  recom- 
mendations addressed  to  him  by  the  [permanent  offi- 
cers of  the]  Department?"  "I  can  hardly  say  that 
they  were.  Mr.  Fawcett  held  very  strong  views  him- 
self as  to  the  propriety  of  making  an  increase  to  the 
pay  of  the  lower  ranks  of  the  Department,  and  he 
carried  out  that  arrangement."  "But  the  Department, 
I  take  for  granted,  was  not  excluded  from  expressing 
an  opinion  upon  the  subject?"  "Certainly  not.  I  be- 
came Secretary  at  the  time  [1880]  when  Mr.  Fawcett 
became   Postmaster   General.^     I   never   should   have 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  24,  1884,  p.  572. 
"From   1874  to   1880   Sir   S.   A.  Blackwood  had  been   Financial 
Secretary  to  the  Post  Office. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  137 

initiated  such  a  movement,  but  I  saw  great  force  in 
many  of  the  reasons  which  Mr.  Fawcett  urged  in  favor 
of  such  an  increase;  and,  at  any  rate,  the  Department, 
as  represented  by  me,  saw  no  reason  to-  raise  a  serious 
opposition,  if  it  were  at  Hberty  to  do  so,  to  the  Post- 
master General's  views  and  determinations."^ 

Before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee,  1897,  Mr.  E. 
B.  L.  Hill,  "practically  commander-in-chief  of  the  pro- 
vincial postmen,"  testified  as  follows  upon  that  part  of 
the  Fawcett  revision  of  1882  that  applied  to  the  postal 
service  proper.  He  said  that  previous  to  1882  all  the 
revisions  of  the  wages  of  the  postmen  had  been  made 
on  the  basis  of  demand  and  supply ;  but  that  the  Faw- 
cett revision  had  departed  from  that  policy.^ 

The  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establishments, 
1888,  took  up  at  some  length,  the  question  of  the  pres- 
sure brought  by  the  civil  servants  upon  the  House  of 
Commons  for  increases  of  wages  and  salaries.  Before 
that  Commission,  Sir  Reginald  E.  Welby,  who  had 
Evidence,  in  ^^t^^^^  ^he  Treasury  in  1856,  had  be- 
1888,  as  to  Civil  come  Assistant  Financial  Secretary  in 
Service  Pressure    jgg^^   ^^^  ^^^  ^^en  made  Permanent 

Secretary  to  the  Treasury  in  1885,  testified  that  many 
Members  of  the  House  of  Commons  had  recently  at- 
tended meetings  of  the  civil  servants  for  the  purpose 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Revenue  Departments 
Estimates ;  q.  403  and  404. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  11,641   to  11,648. 


138  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

of  endorsing  the  claims  of  the  civil  servants  for  in- 
creases of  pay;  and  that  they  had  taken  that  action 
without  having  made  a  close  examination  of  the 
grounds  upon  which  the  civil  servants  had  put  for- 
ward their  claims.  He  added:  "It  is  utterly  impos- 
sible for  us  [the  Treasury]  to  ignore  these  symptoms 
that  make  it  very  difficult  to  keep  within  reasonable 
bounds  the  remuneration  of  such  a  body."  Thereupon 
one  of  the  members  of  the  Royal  Commission  said  to 
Sir  R.  Welby:  ....  "but  are  you  not  aware  that 
there  is  a  general  feeling  throughout  the  country  among 
the  people  who  are  employed  by  private  individuals 
and  public  bodies  [other  than  the  State],  that  Govern- 
ment servants  receive  higher  pay  than  they  do,  and 
that  when  these  persons  are  called  upon  to  exercise  the 
franchise  they  bring  pressure  to  bear  upon  their  Mem- 
bers just  the  other  way  [i.  e.,  against  the  increase  of 
government  wages  and  salaries]  ?"  Sir  R.  Welby  re- 
plied :  "Of  course,  I  have  no  means  of  testing  that.  I 
am  very  glad  to  hear  that  Parliamentary  influence  is 
not  all  in  one  direction.  We  do  not  see  the  proof  of  it 
at  the  Treasury."^ 

Sir  Algernon  E.  West,  Chairman  Inland  Revenue 
Commissioners,^  said  he  wished  for  a  greater  spirit  of 
economy,    "not   in   the  offices   so  much    as   outside." 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 
ments, 1888;  q.  10,562-3,  10,742  to  10,749,  .and  10,772  to  10,783. 

^  Who's  Who,  1903,  West,  Sir  Algernon  E. ;  Was  a  clerk  in  the 
Admiralty ;  Assistant  Secretary  to  Sir  C.  Wood  and  Duke  of  Somer- 
set ;  Secretary  to  Sir  C.  Wood  at  India  Office,  and  to  Mr.  Gladstone 
when  Prime  Minister ;  Chairman  of  Board  of  Inland  Revenue. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  139 

Thereupon  the  Chairman  of  the  Royal  Commission 
said :  **I  do  not  quite  understand  what  you  mean  by  out- 
side." Sir  Algernon  E.  West  replied :  "I  say  it  with  all 
possible  deference,  particularly  Parliament."  To  the 
further  query:  "Has  there  been  on  the  part  of  Mem- 
bers of  Parliament,  an  increase  of  intervention  on  be- 
half either  of  the  individual  officers  of  the  Inland 
Revenue  or  on  behalf  of  classes  of  the  Inland  Revenue 
since  the  enfranchisement  in  1869?"  Sir  A.  West 
replied :  "A  large  increase  on  behalf  of  classes,  not  of 

individuals I  should  like  to  add  ....  that  I 

think  last  year  the  Lower  Division  clerks  succeeded  in 
getting  two  hundred  Members  of  Parliament  to  attend 
a  meeting  which  was  held  to  protest  against  their 
grievances."^ 

Sir  Lyon  Playfair,  who  had  been  Chairman  of  the 
Royal  Commission  on  the  Civil  Service,  1874  to  1876, 
and  the  author  of  the  Playfair  Reorganization  of  the 
Civil  Service,  1876,  testified  as  follows  before  the 
Royal  Commission  of  1888.  "Unfortunately  Mem- 
bers of  Parliament  yield  to  pressure  a  great  deal  too 
much  in  that  direction,  and  they  are  certainly  pressing 
the  Exchequer  to  increase  the  wages  and  salaries  of 
the  employees  of  the  Crown In  a  private  estab- 
lishment a  man  looks  after  his  own  interests,  and  if  a 
person  came  to  him  and  said :  *Now  you  must  increase 
the  salaries  of  these  men  by  $100  or  $250  all  round,' 

*  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establishments, 
1888;  q.  17,438  to  17,447- 


140  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

he  would  say :  *You  are  an  impertinent  man,  you  have 
no  business  to  interfere/  but  you  cannot  say  that  to 
Members  of  ParHament,  and  there  is  continual  pressure 
from  Members  of  Parliament  to  augment  the  salaries 
of  the  civil  servants."^ 

With  the  increase  of  the  number  of  telegraphic  mes- 
sages transmitted,  from  33,278,000  in  1884-85,  to 
62,403,000  in  1889-90,  the  average  sum  spent  on 
wages  and  salaries  per  message  transmitted,  fell  from 
Raikes  Revision  1372  cents  in  1884-85,  to  IO.62  cents 
of  1890-91  in    1889-90.     In    the   following   year, 

1890-91,  Mr.  Raikes,  Postmaster  General,  inaugurated 
an  extensive  scheme  of  increases  in  wages,  reductions 
in  the  hours  of  work,  and  other  "improvements  in  the 
condition"  of  the  telegraph  employees,  that  again 
raised  to  12.28  cents  per  message  in  1894-95,  the  aver- 
age sum  spent  on  wages  and  salaries.  Mr.  Raikes, 
Postmaster  General,  raised  the  wages  of  the  supervis- 
ing staff,  as  well  as  the  wages  of  the  rank  and  file  f  he 
granted  payment  at  one  and  one-quarter  rates  for  over 
time,  granted  payment  at  double  rates  for  all  work 
done  on  Sunday,  gave  extra  pay  for  work  done  on 
Bank  Holidays,  and  increased  from  half  pay  to  full  pay 
the  sick-leave  allowance.     The  annual  cost  of  those 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 
ments, 1888;  q.  20,238. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897,  Mr.  Lewin  Hill,  Assistant  Secretary,  General 
Post  Office,  London;  q.  15,123  and  15,119. 

The  subjoined  table  shows  the  changes  made  in  the  wages   of 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES 


141 


concessions  Mr.  Raikes  estimated  at  $500,000  a  year. 
The  cost  of  the  concessions  granted  at  the  same  time 
to  the  employees  in  the  postal  branch  of  the  Post 
Office  Department,  he  estimated  at  $535,000  a  year.^ 
Mr.  Raikes'  schemes  were  based  largely  upon  the 
Report  of  Committee  of  the  Indoor  Staff.  That  Re- 
port has  not  been  published;  but  in  1896,  Mr.  Lewin 
Hill,  Assistant  Secretary  General  Post  Office,  London, 
stated  before  the  so-called  Tweedmouth  Committee,^ 
that  the  majority  of  the  committee  on  the  Indoor  Staff 


the  second  class  provincial  telegraphists,  who  enter  the  service  as 
boys  and  girls,  from  fourteen  years  upward,  and  are  taught  teleg- 
raphy at  the  cost  of  the  Department. 


Age  of  the  Telegraphist 
Years 


16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 . 
22 

23 

24, 

25 
26, 
27 
28, 
29, 
30. 
31- 


Wage  Under  the 
Fawcett  Scheme 

$ 


4.00 
4.37 
4.7s 
5.12 
5.50 
5.87 
6.25 
6.62 
7.00 
7-37 
7-75 
8.12 
8.50 
8.87 
9.25 
9.50 


Wage  Under  the 

Raikes  Scheme 

$ 


3-50 

4.50 

5.00 

5.50 

6.00 

6.50 

7.00 

7.50 

8.00 

8.50 

9.00 

9-50 

10.00 

10.00 

10.00 

10.00 


^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  i,  1890,  p.  1,623  and 
following;  April  17,  1891,  p.  883;  and  August  i,  1891,  p.  1,059  and 
following. 

'Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  11,706. 


142  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

had  signed  the  Report  because  they  beheved  that  if 
the  concessions  recommended  in  the  Report  were 
granted,  ''that  would  be  the  end  of  all  agitation."  Mr. 
Hill  added :  ''I  remember  myself  saying  [to  the  Com- 
mittee] whatever  else  happens,  that  will  not  happen. 
Do  not  delude  yourselves  with  the  notion  that  the  men 
•will  cease  to  ask."  He  continued:  "Mr.  Raikes'  im- 
provements were  received  with  the  greatest  gratitude, 
and  there  were  any  number  of  letters  of  thanks  from 
the  staff;  but  the  ink  was  scarcely  dry  when  the  de- 
mands began  again,  and  they  have  been  going  on  ever 

since,  and  will  go  on There  is,  unfortunately, 

a  growing  habit  among  the  main  body  of  Post  Office 
servants  to  use  their  voting  power  at  elections  to  get 
higher  pay  for  themselves,  and  it  is  well  known  that  in 
constituencies  in  which  political  parties  are  at  all  evenly 
balanced,  the  Post  Office  servants  can  turn  the  elec- 
tion." 

The  Committee  on  the  Indoor  Staff  appointed  by 
Mr.  Raikes  in  March,  1890,  had  not  had  the  approval' 
of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  civil  servants,  nor  had  it  had 
the  approval  of  the  representatives  of  the  civil  servants 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  on  the  ground  that  it  con- 
sisted of  government  officials,  who  were  not  responsible 
directly  to  the  voters.  Therefore  one  of  the  leading 
representatives  in  the  House  of  Commons  of  the  Post 
Office  employees.  Earl  Compton,^  on  April  15,  1890, 

'  Who's  Who,  1903,  Compton,  family  name  of  Marquis  of 
Northampton. 

Northampton,  5th  Marquis  of,  Wbdu  G^Q^  Spencer  Scott  Comp- 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  143 

had  moved :  "That,  in  the  opinion  of  the  House,  the 
present  position  of  the  telegraphists  in  London  and 
elsewhere  is  unsatisfactory,  and  their  just  grievances 

Earl  Compton  require  redress."^  In  the  course  of  his 
demands  a  Select  i.     r^     ^    r^         i.  •  j      <c-o 

Committee  argument.   Earl  Compton  said:     Per- 

haps the  Right  Honorable  Gentleman  [the  Postmaster 
General]  has  been  cramped  [in  the  administration  of 
his  department]  by  what  is  called  officialism.  In  that 
case,  if  the  present  motion  is  passed,  the  Right  Honor- 
able Gentleman's  hands  will  be  strengthened  [against 
his  permanent  officials],  and  he  will  be  able  to  redress 
the  grievances  which  have  been  brought  under  his 
attention." 

Baron  F.  de  Rothschild  followed  Earl  Compton,  with 
the  statement :  "The  Postmaster  General  may  well  say 
it  is  no  business  of  ours  to  interfere  between  the  civil 
servants  and  himself,  but  here  I  would  venture  to  ask 
him  whether  the  civil  servants  are  not  quite  as  much 
our  [i.  e.,  the  public's]  servants  as  they  are  those  of  the 
Postmaster  General?"  Baron  de  Rothschild  went  on 
to  say  that  through  an  error  made  in  the  course  of  the 
transmission  of  a  telegram  his  betting  agent  had  placed 
his  money  on  the  wrong  horse,  causing  him  to  lose  a 
considerable  sum  of  money.  Such  mistakes  would 
not  occur  if  the  telegraphists  were  better  paid. 


ton ;  was  in  Diplomatic  Service ;  Private  Secretary  to  Lord  Lieu- 
tenant of  Ireland  (Earl  Cowper),  1880  to  1882;  Member  of 
Parliament  (G.  L.)  1889  to  1897  ;  owns  about  23,600  acres. 

'^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April    15,    1890,  p.   581    and 
following. 


144  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Sir  A.  Borthwick  regretted  "the  increasing  tendency 
to  invoke  the  direct  interposition  of  Parliament  be- 
tween the  Executive  Government  and  the  Civil  Serv- 
ice." 

The  Postmaster  General  concluded  his  statement 
with  the  words :  "I  hope  that  after  the  statement  which 
I  have  been  able  to  make,  the  House  will  recognize 
the  claim  of  every  Government  that  the  House  shall 
not  interfere  with  matters  of  Departmental  adminis- 
tration, except  where  it  thinks  fit  to  censure  the  Minis- 
ter in  charge.  So  long  as  a  Minister  occupies  his  posi- 
tion at  the  head  of  a  department,  he  ought  to  be  allowed 
to  occupy  it  in  his  own  way.  I  venture  to  hope 
that  the  House  will  leave  questions  of  this  sort  in  the 
hands  of  those  who  are  directly  and  primarily  respon- 
sible for  them,  in  the  belief  that  grievances  of  the 
servants  of  any  department  are  not  likely  to  lack  care- 
ful consideration,  and,  I  believe,  just  and  fair  treat- 
ment." 

A  few  months  later,  the  Postmaster  General  made 
this  statement  in  the  House  of  Commons :  "I  wish  to 
correct  one  misapprehension.  It  is  supposed  that  the 
position  of  the  Government  is  that  only  the  market 
value  should  be  paid  for  labor  of  this  sort  [the  non- 
established  post  office  servants].  Those  who  sat  in 
the  Committee  [of  Supply]  will  remember  that  I  laid 
down  a  different  doctrine  the  other  day.  My  own 
view  is,  that  while  the  market  value  must  be  the  gov- 
erning consideration,  because  we  are  not  dealing  with 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  145 

our  own  money,  but  with  the  money  of  the  taxpayers, 
the  taxpayers  would  wish  that,  in  applying  that  stand- 
ard to  those  in  the  Public  Service,  we  should  always 
bear  in  mind  that  a  great  Government  should  treat  its 
employees  liberally."^ 

Earl  Compton  failed  to  carry  his  motion  in  1890; 
and  in  the  following  year  he  made  another  unsuccessful 
attempt,  moving :  *That,  in  the  opinion  of  this  House, 
it  is  desirable  that  a  Select  Committee  be  appointed  to 
inquire  into  the  Administration  of  the  Post  Office."^ 

Mr.  Ambrose,  speaking  against  the  motion,  said: 
"Questions  between  capital  and  labor  and  between  the 
Government  and  its  employees  should  not  be  influenced 
by  motions  in  the  House.  We  are  all  subjected  as 
Members  of  this  House  to  all  manner  of  whips  from 
employees  of  the  Civil  Service  and  the  Post  Oflice,  and 
I  know  that  when  the  status  of  the  Civil  Service  clerks 
was  being  settled  some  time  ago,  there  was,  among 
Members  generally,  a  feeling  of  disgust  at  the  tele- 
grams and  letters  being  received  almost  very  minute 
from  people  seeking  to  influence  our  votes  on  some 
particular  question  of  interest  to  them." 

Mr.  Raikes,  Postmaster  General,  enumerated  in  de- 
tail the  concessions  made  to  the  telegraphists  and  letter 
sorters  in  1890  and  1891,  at  a  cost  of  $1,035,000  a 
year,  and  added :  "and  to  all  this,  not  one  single  refer- 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  31,  1890,  p.  i,44i. 
^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April   17,   1891,  p.  851   and 
following.  ^^JJ^'vlBRA^ 

^^  /f  or -HE 

((  UNIVERSITY 

OF 
J^LIFO 


146  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

encc  has  escaped  those  who  have  spoken."  He  con- 
cluded with  the  words :  "It  would  never  do  if,  in  order 
to  encourage  the  vaporings  of  three  or  four  of  those 
gutter  journals  which  disfigure  the  Metropolitan  Press, 
Members  of  this  House  were  to  make  the  grave  mis- 
take of  throwing  discredit  upon  a  body  of  men  like  the 
permanent  officials  [Executive  Officers]  of  the  Post 
Office,  of  whom  any  country  might  be  proud,  with 
whom,  I  believe,  any  Minister  would  be  delighted  to 
work,  and  of  diminishing  the  authority  in  his  own 
Department  of  a  Minister,  who,  whatever  may  be  his 
personal  deficiencies,  at  heart  believes  that  he  has  done 
nothing  to  forfeit  the  confidence  of  this  House." 

A  few  months  later,  when  the  House  was  consider- 
ing the  Estimates  of  the  Post  Office  Department,  the 
Postmaster  General  said:  "Economists  [advocates  of 
economy]  of  former  days  would  have  been  interested 
and  surprised  by  the  general  tenor  of  the  debate  to 
which  we  have  just  listened.  The  great  point  used  to 
be,  as  I  understand,  to  show  a  large  balance  of  revenue 
to  the  State  [from  the  Post  Office],  and  to  make  a  de- 
fense against  charges  of  extravagance  in  the  past.  But 
we  have  now  arrived  at  a  time  when  the  opposite  course 
is  to  be  taken,  and  the  only  chance  a  Minister  has  of 
enjoying  the  confidence  of  this  House  is  to  point  to  a 
diminished  balance  of  revenue  and  to  a  greater  ex- 
penditure on  the  part  of  the  department."  ....  In 
1891-92  our  telegraph  expenditure  will  increase  by 
$3,ocx),ooo,  while  our  revenue  will  increase  by  $1,700,- 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  147 

ooo ;  "the  reason  is  to  be  found  in  the  very  comprehen- 
sive measures  framed  in  the  course  of  the  last  year  for 
the  improvement  of  the  position  of  the  staff."^ 

Mr.  Raikes  died  in  August,  1891 ;  and  in  June,  1892, 
Sir  James  Fergnsson,  his  successor,  asked  the  House 
of  Commons  to  permit  him  to  call  attention  to  a  circu- 
lar addressed  to  Candidates  at  the  [im*pending]  Gen- 
^.  .,  ^  eral  Election,  and  also  sent  to  Members 

circularize  c>f  the  [present]  House.     The  circular 

Members  of  had  been  issued  by  "The  Provincial 
Parliament  p^^^^j    Telegraph    Male    Clerks''    to 

"Candidates  at  the  General  Election,"  and  contained 
the  following  statement :  "We  have,  in  addition,  to  ask 
you  whether  you  will,  if  elected,  vote  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  Parliamentary  Committee  to  inquire  into 
the  working  of  the  Telegraph  Service,  as  we  believe 
such  an  investigation  would  be  of  great  utility,  and 
could  not  but  tend  to  the  improvement  of  the  service, 
the  state  of  which  is  causing  great  public  dissatisfac- 
tion, as  will  be  seen  from  the  subjoined  newspaper  ex- 
tracts. In  conclusion,  we  beg  to  state  that  we  await 
your  reply  to  these  few  questions  of  vital  importance 
with  considerable  anxiety,  and  trust  that  you  will  give 
them  your  careful  consideration." 

Sir  James  Fergusson  added  that  another  branch  of 
the  Post  Office  servants  was  issuing  similar  circulars.^ 

'^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  1,  1891,  p.  1,059  and 
following. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  February  18,  1898,  p.  1,109. 
S.  Woods  quotes  as  follows  from  the  circular  issued  by  the  Fawcett 


148  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

He  said,  "I  think  that  there  would  be  an  end  to  the 
discipline  which  should  characterize  members  of  the 
Public  Service  if  encouragement  were  given  to  such 
attempts  to  bring  pressure  to  bear  on  Members  of 
the  House  and  Candidates  on  the  eve  of  a  General  Elec- 
tion  I  have  to  say  that  the  leading  Members 

of  the  Opposition,  including  the  right  honorable  Mem- 
ber for  Midlothian  [Mr.  W.  E.  Gladstone],  and  the 
right  honorable  Member  for  Derby  [Sir  Wm.  Har- 
court] ,  fully  concur  in  the  observations  I  have  made."^ 

A  few  days  later,  the  Postmaster  General  issued  the 
following  notice :  "The  Postmaster  General  at  the  same 
time  warns  Post  Office  servants  that  it  would  be  im- 
proper for  them,  in  combination  or  individually,  to 
endeavor  to  extract  promises  from  any  candidate  for 
election  to  the  House  of  Commons  with  reference  to 
their  pay  or  duties." 

In  the  House  of  Commons  Sir  James  Fergusson  de- 
fended this  notice  in  these  words:  "I  in  no  way  deny 
the  right  of  Members  of  the  Public  Service  to  appeal 
to  Members  of  this  House  to  get  their  case  represented 
here,  but  there  is  all  the  difference  between  Members 
being  asked  to  represent  a  prima  facie  case,  and  candi- 
dates being  asked  to  pledge  themselves  upon  an  ex- 


Association  in  June,  1892:  "Will  you,  in  the  event  of  being  elected 
a  Member  of  Parliament,  support  a  motion  for  the  appointment  of  a 
Parliamentary  Committee  of  Inquiry  into  the  Post  Office  Service, 
such  as  was  advocated  by  Earl  Compton,  and  largely  supported  dur- 
ing the  recent  Session  of  the  House  of  Commons?" 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  14,   1892,  p.   1,123  and 
following. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  149 

parte  statement  to  support  a  revision  [of  wages  and 
salaries]  or  a  commission  of  inquiry — in  fact,  to  pre- 
judge the  case.  To  ask  for  such  a  promise  as  a  con- 
dition of  giving  a  vote  does  seem  to  me  inconsistent 
with  the  duties  of  a  public  servant,  and  to  go  beyond 
his  constitutional  privileges.  In  that  view  the  warn- 
ing has  been  issued.  By  what  law  or  right  has  this 
been  done,  the  honorable  Member  asks?  By  the 
right  and  duty  which  belongs  to  the  head  of  a  Depart- 
ment to  preserve  proper  discipline."^ 

In  August,  1892,  the  Salisbury  Government  was 
succeeded  by  the  Gladstone  Government,  and  Mr. 
Arnold  Morley  became  Postmaster  General.  On 
August  28,  1893,  Mr.  W.  E.  Gladstone,  First  Lord  of 
the  Treasury,  in  reply  to  a  question  from  Mr.  Mac- 
donald,  said:  "Questions  may  be  raised,  on  which  I 
have  no  judgment  to  give  on  the  part  of  the  Govern- 
ment, as  to  how  far,  for  example,  it  is  desirable  for  the 
public  functionaries  to  make  use  of  their  position  as 
voters  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  from  candidates 
promises  or  engagements  tending  directly  to  the  ad- 
vantage of  public  servants  in  respect  of  pay  and  pro- 
motion. These  are  matters  which  we  deem  not  un- 
deserving of  consideration;  but  still  they  do  not  form 
the  subject  of  any  decision  on  the  part  of  Her  Majesty's 
Government  in  the  nature  of  a  restraint. "^     In  accord- 


^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  20,   1892,  p.  1,565  and 
following. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  28,  1893,  p.  1,218. 


150  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

ance  with  the  policy  thus  announced,  the  Gladstone 
Ministry  rescinded  Sir  James  Fergusson's  order  of 
June  17,  1892.^ 

In  September,  1893,  while  the  House  was  in  Com- 
mittee of  Supply,  Mr.  Macdonald^  moved  "a  reduc- 
tion of  $500  in  respect  of  the  Salary  of  the  Post- 
master General,"  in  order  to  bring  before  the  com- 
mittee the  demand  of  the  Post  Office  employees  for 
"an  independent  inquiry  by  a  Parliamentary  Com- 
mittee." He  stated  "that  in  1891  the  present  Post- 
master General  [Mr.  Arnold  Morley]  voted  in  favor 
Mr.  Macdondd  ^^  '^^  inquiry  such  as  that  for  which 
demands  a  Select  he  [Mr.  Macdonald]  now  asked,  and 
Committee  ^^  wished  to  know  whether  anything 

had  occurred  to  cause  the  Right  Honorable  Gentleman 
to  change  his  view  since  that  time."^ 

The  Postmaster  General,  Mr.  Morley,  replied:  "He 
was  asked  how  he  could  account  for  his  vote  in  1891 
when  he  had  supported  the  Motion  of  the  noble  Earl, 
the  Member  for  Barnsley  [Earl  Compton]  ?  He 
accounted  for  it  on  two  grounds:  He  had  supported 
the  proposal,  which  was  an  unprecedented  one,  because 
there  was  an  unprecedented  condition  of  discontent 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  May  17,  1895,  p.  i,455»  Sir 
A.  K.  Rollit,  one  of  the  most  aggressive  champions  of  the  demands 
of  the  civil  servants. 

^  Who's  Who,  1903.  Macdonald,  J,  A.  M. ;  Member  of  Parlia- 
ment for  Bow  and  Bromley,  1892  to  1895  ;  Member  of  the  London 
School  Board  for  Marylebone  since  1897;  Education:  Edinburgh 
and  Glasgow  Universities. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  September  16,  1893,  p.  1,453 
and  following. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  151 

prevailing  throughout  the  Postal  and  Telegraph  Serv- 
ice— or,  he  confessed,  he  was  under  that  impression 
at  the  time..  The  condition  of  things  in  various 
branches  of  the  Service  was  serious.  There  had  been 
an  emeute  in  the  Savings  Bank  Department,  and 
whether  with  reason  or  without  reason,  the  whole  of 
the  Services  were  discontented  with  their  position.  The 
condition  of  things  at  present,  however,  did  not  bear 
out  the  idea  that  there  was  anything  like  general  dis- 
content prevailing.  He  accounted  for  his  action  on 
another  ground.  Since  1891  large  concessions  had 
been  made,  with  enormous  additional  expense  to  the 
country,  and  that  made  the  state  of  things  very  differ- 
ent to  what  it  was  when  he  supported  the  noble  Earl's 
Motion." 

Earl  Compton  said:  "He  had  several  times  in  past 
years  stood  up  and  spoken  for  the  telegraph  clerks, 
and  as  the  Amendment  before  the  committee  related 
practically  to  them,  it  would  be  dishonest  and  mean  on 
his  part,  if,  having  taken  a  strong  course  [while  sit- 
ting] in  opposition,  he  did  not  take  the  same  course 
now  his  friends  were  in  power." 

Mr.  Macdonald's  Motion  was  lost. 

In  May,  1895,  Mr.  Kearley^  moved:  "That  in  the 
opinion  of  this  House,  it  is  highly  desirable  that  the 

^  Who's  Who,  1905,  Kearley,  H.  E.,  J.  P.,  D.  L.,  Member  of 
Parliament  (G.  L.),  Devenport,  since  1892.  Director  of  Kearley 
and  Tonge,  L't'd.,  tea  importers  and  merchants;  owns  1,200  acres. 
In  1906  Mr.  Kearley  became  Political  Secretary  of  the  Board  of 
Trade  in  the  Campbell-Bannerman  Ministry. 


152  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

terms  and  conditions  of  employment  in  the  Post  Office 
should  be  made  the  subject  of  competent  and  immediate 
Mr,  Kearley  de-  inquiry,  with  a  view  to  the  removal  of 
mands  a  Select  any  reasonable  cause  of  complaint 
Committee  ^j^j^^j^  j^^y  1^^  ^^^^^  ^^  exist."^      The 

Motion  was  seconded  by  Sir  Albert  K.  Rollit.^  Mr. 
Kearley  stated  at  the  outset,  that  his  remarks  would 
be  directed  to  the  advisability  of  granting  some  in- 
quiry. He  was  not  in  a  position  to  assert  that  any 
particular  alleged  grievance  really  existed  as  stated  by 
the  employees;  but  there  could  be  no  doubt  that  there 
was  general  discontent."  Mr.  Kearley  next  stated 
that  the  most  serious  grievance  alleged  by  the  Post 
Office  employees  was  inadequacy  of  pay  arising  from 
stagnation  of  promotion.  It  was  true  that  at  the  time 
the  blocking  extended  only  to  the  more  highly  paid  por- 
tions of  the  rank  and  file,  but  it  must  soon  extend  to 
the  general  body  of  employees  unless  relief  were 
afforded.  In  1880,  and  in  1890,  Parliament  had 
sanctioned  respectively  the  Fawcett  revision  of  wages, 
and  the  Raikes  revision,  for  the  purpose  of  correcting 
inadequacies  of  pay  arising  from  stagnation  of  promo- 

^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  May  17,  1895,  p.  1,446  and 
following. 

2  Who's  Who,  1905,  Rollit,  Sir  Albert  Kaye,  J.  P.,  LL.  D.,  D.  C.  L., 
D.  L.,  Member  of  Parliament,  South  Islington,  since  1886.  Part- 
ner in  Bailey  and  Leatham,  steamship  owners  at  Hull,  New- 
castle and  London ;  Director  of  National  Telephone  Co. ;  Mayor  of 
Hull,  1883  to  1885  ;  President  Associated  Chambers  of  Commerce 
of  the  United  Kingdom,  1890  to  1896;  President  London  Chamber 
of  Commerce,  1893  to  1898;  Chairman  Inspection  Committee  Trus- 
tee Savings  Bank  since  1890;  President  of  Association  of  Municipal 
Corporations. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  153 

tion.  The  employees  now  demanded  the  abolition  of 
the  classes  into  which  were  divided  the  various  grades 
of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  Post  Office  employees ;  they 
demanded  assured  promotion  to  a  definite  maximum 
wage  or  salary. 

That  demand  rested  on  the  assumption  that  the 
employees  had  a  vested  right  to  the  rate  of  promo- 
tion that  had  obtained  under  the  extraordinary  in- 
crease of  telegraphic  business  that  had  followed  the 
transfer  of  the  telegraphs  to  the  State  in  1870,  and  had 
followed  the  adoption  of  the  12  cent  tariff  in  October, 
1885.1 

Mr.  Kearley  supported  his  argument  by  reference 
to  the  telegraphists,  who  enter  the  service  between  the 
ages  of  fourteen  and  eighteen,  as  second  class  teleg- 
raphists, and  in  the  course  of  fourteen  years  rise  by 
annual  increments  from  the  wage  of  $3  a  week  to  $10 
a  week.  At  the  latter  wage  they  remain,  unless  they 
are  promoted  to  be  first  class  telegraphists,  whose 
wages  rise  by  annual  increments,  from  $10  a  week  to 
$14  a  week — payment  for  over  time,  and  so  forth,  being 
excluded  in  all  cases.  Mr.  Kearley  argued  that  pro- 
motion from  the  second  class  to  the  first  class  was 
blocked,  stating  that  in  Birmingham,  in  the  last  4^ 

*  In  1891-92  to  1894-95  the  number  of  telegrams  transmitted  had 
remained  practically  stationary. 

Number  of  Telegrams 

1890-91 66,409,000 

1891-92 69,685,000 

1892-93 69,908,000 

1893-94 70,899,000 

1894-95 71,589,000 


154  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

years,  only  ii  men  in  i68  had  been  promoted  from 
second  class  telegraphists  to  first  class  telegraphists; 
and  that  in  Belfast  and  Edinburgh  the  annual  rate  of 
promotion  had  been  respectively  1.14  per  cent,  and  2 
per  cent.  Those  instances,  said  the  speaker,  were 
typical  of  the  larger  cities ;  the  conditions  in  the  smaller 
cities  and  in  the  towns  being  still  worse. 

Mr.  Arnold  Morley,  Postmaster  General,  replied  to 
this  part  of  Mr.  Kearley's  argument  with  the  statement 
that  there  were  in  London  and  in  the  Provinces  3,308 
second  class  male  telegraphists,  and  that  out  of  that 
number  only  65  were  both  eligible  for  promotion  and 
in  receipt  of  the  maximum  wage  of  the  second  class, 
namely  $10  a  week.  He  added  that  the  average  wage 
of  the  men  telegraphists  who  had  been  promoted  from 
the  second  class  to  the  first  in  1894  had  been  $8.46. 
That  meant  that,  on  an  average,  the  men  in  question 
had  been  promoted  three  years  before  they  had  reached 
the  maximum  wage  of  the  second  class.  The  Post- 
master General  characterized  as  "extraordinarly  mis- 
leading" the  source  from  which  Mr.  Kearley  had  tak- 
en his  statements  of  fact,  namely,  a  table  in  a  pamphlet 
issued  by  the  telegraphists  in  support  of  their  conten- 
tion that  promotion  was  blocked.  The  compilers  of 
the  table  had  left  out  promotions  "due  to  causes  other 
than  what  were  termed  ordinary  causes,  namely  pro- 
motions due  to  appointments  to  postmasterships  and 
chief  clerkships,  to  transfers  from  provincial  offices  to 
the  central  ofifice  in   London,   and   to  reductions  of 


I 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  155 

officers  on  account  of  misconduct."  Thus  at  Birming- 
ham there  had  been,  not  ii  promotions,  but  i6;  at 
Liverpool,  not  8,  but  37;  at  Belfast,  not  4,  but  14; 
at  Newcastle,  not  5,  but  24;  at  Bristol,  not  6,  but  13; 
at  Southampton,  not  2,  but  8. 

The  second  alleged  grievance  brought  forward  by 
Mr.  Kearley  related  to  the  so-called  auxiliary  staff, 
which  consisted  of  men  who  supplemented  their  earn- 
ings in  private  employment  by  working  for  the  Post 
Office  in  the  mail  branch.  It  was  stated  that  the  Post 
Office  was  paying  the  auxiliary  staff  from  $3.75  to 
$4.00  a  week,  whereas  it  should  pay  at  least  $6.00  a 
week.  The  third  grievance  related  to  the  so-called 
split  duties,  which  involved  in  the  course  of  the  24 
hours  of  the  day  more  than  one  attendance  at  the  office. 
The  abolition  of  those  duties  was  demanded.  The 
fourth  grievance  was  that  some  of  the  younger  em- 
ployees were  obliged  to  take  their  annual  three  weeks' 
vacation  [on  full  pay]  in  the  months  of  November  to 
February. 

Sir  Albert  Rollit,^  in  seconding  the  motion,  termed 
"reasonable"  the  demand  of  the  telegraphists  that  the 
wages  of  the  London  telegraphists  should  rise  auto- 
matically to  $1,150  a  year;  and  those  of  the  provincial 

*  Who's  Who,  190S,  Rollit,  Sir  Albert  Kaye,  J.  P.,  LL.D.,  D.  C.L., 
D.  L.,  M.  P.,  South  Islington,  since  1886.  Partner  in  Bailey  and 
Leetham,  steamship  owners  at  Hull,  Newcastle  and  London ;  Director 
of  National  Telephone  Co.;  Mayor  of  Hull,  1883  to  1885  ;  President 
Associated  Chambers  of  Commerce  of  the  United  Kingdom,  1890  to 
1896;  President  London  Chamber  of  Commerce,  1893  to  1898; 
Chairman  Inspection  Committee  Trustee  Savings  Bank  since  1890; 
President  of  Association  of  Municipal  Corporations. 


156  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

telegraphists  to  $i,ooo  a  year.  At  the  time  the  max- 
imum wage  attainable  in  London  was  $950,  while  the 
maximum  attainable  in  the  provinces  was  $800.  Sir 
Albert  Rollit  added  that  the  recent  order  of  the  Post 
Office  that  first  class  telegraphists  must  pass  certain 
technical  examinations  or  forego  further  promotion 
and  further  increments  in  pay,  "amounted  almost  to 
tyranny,"  and  he  further  reflected  that  "where  law 
ended,  tyranny  began."  Sir  Albert  Rollit,  an  eminent 
merchant  and  capitalist,  contended  that  when  the  ex- 
isting body  of  telegraphists  had  entered  the  service, 
no  knowledge  of  the  technics  of  telegraphy  had  been 
required,  and  that  therefore  it  would  be  a  breach  oi 
contract  to  require  the  present  staff  to  acquire  such 
knowledge  unless  it  were  specifically  paid  for  going  to 
the  trouble  of  acquiring  such  knowledge.  That  con- 
tention of  Sir  Albert  Rollit  was  but  one  of  many  in- 
stances of  the  extraordinary  doctrine  of  "vested  rights" 
developed  by  the  British  Civil  Service,  and  recognized 
by  the  British  Government,  namely,  that  the  State  may 
make  no  changes  in  the  terms  and  conditions  of  em- 
ployment, unless  it  shall  indemnify  by  money  pay- 
ments the  persons  affected  by  the  changes.  If  the 
State  shall  be  unwilling  to  make  such  indemnification, 
the  changes  in  the  terms  and  conditions  of  employment 
must  be  made  to  apply  only  to  persons  who  shall  enter 
the  service  in  the  future ;  they  may  not  be  made  to  apply 
to  those  already  in  the  service.  This  doctrine  is  sup- 
ported in  the  House  of  Commons  by  eminent  mer- 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES 


157 


chants,  manufacturers  and  capitalists.  Sir  Albert  K. 
Rollit,  for  instance,  is  a  steamship  owner  at  Hull,  New- 
castle and  London;  a  Director  of  the  National  Tele- 
phone Company,  and  he  has  held  for  six  years  and  five 
years  respectively  the  positions  of  President  of  the 
Associated  Chambers  of  Commerce  of  the  United 
Kingdom  and  President  of  the  London  Chamber  of 
Commerce. 

When  Sir  Albert  Rollit  argued  that  the  Government 
had  broken  faith  with  the  telegraphers,  those  public 
servants,  acting  under  instructions  from  their  leaders, 
were  neglecting  to  avail  themselves  of  their  oppor- 
tunities to  learn  the  elementary  scientific  principles 
underlying  telegraphy,  and  were  even  repudiating  the 
obligation  to  acquire  knowledge  of  those  principles. 
The  state  of  affairs  was  such  that  the  Engineer-in-Chief 
of  the  Telegraphs,  Mr.  W.  H.  Preece,  began  to 
fear  that  before  long  he  would  be  unable  to  fill  the 
positions  requiring  an  elementary  knowledge  of  the 
technics  of  telegraphy.^ 

Mr.  Arnold  Morley,  Postmaster  General,  began  his 
reply  to  Mr.  Kearley's  Motion  with  the  statement  that 
"he  understood  the  mover  of  the  Motion  spoke  on  be- 
half of  those  in  the  Post  Office  service  who  had  taken 
an  active  part  in  the  promoting  what  he  might  call  an 
agitation,  and  that  his  [Mr.  Kearley's]  position  was 


^Report  of  Bradford  Committee  on  Post  Office  Wages,  1904;  q. 
1,024;  Mr.  E.  Trenam,  Controller  London  Central  Telegraph  Office; 
and  q.  1,048,  Mr.  W.  G.  Kirkwood,  a  principal  clerk  in  Secretary's 
department.   General  Post  Office. 


158  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

that,  in  the  condition  of  feehng  in  the  service,  some 
steps  ought  to  be  taken  which  would  enable  the  real 
facts  to  be  brought  not  only  before  the  public,  but  be- 
fore Parliament."  ....  He  [Mr.  Morley]  had  made 
a  careful  examination  of  most  of  the  alleged  grievances 
during  the  three  years  he  had  been  at  the  Post  Office, 
and  though  he  had  satisfied  himself  that  in  the  main 
they  were  not  well  founded,  he  recognized  that  a  very 
strong  feeling  existed  not  only  among  a  portion  of  the 
staff,  but  also  among  the  public,  and  among  Members 
of  the  House. 

The  feeling  in  question  the  Postmaster  General 
attributed  largely  to  the  manner  in  which  the  case 
o£  the  telegraphists  had  been  presented  by  the  teleg- 
raphists in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  in  the  news- 
paper press.  He  spoke  of  the  "extraordinarily  mis- 
The  Civil  Serv-  heading"  table  of  promotions  published 
ants'  Campaign  by  the  telegraphists.  He  then  went 
of  Education  ^n  to  State  that  recently  the  Postmaster 
at  Bristol  had  reorganized  the  local  telegraph  office.  By 
reducing  the  amount  of  over-time  work,  and  by  abolish- 
ing four  junior  offices,  he  had  effected  a  saving  of  $3,- 
000  to  $3,500  a  year.  Thereupon  a  local  newspaper 
had  come  out  with  the  heading:  "A  Premium  on 
Sweating;"  and  had  made  the  statement,  which  was 
not  true,  that  the  local  Postmaster  had  received  a 
premium  of  $500  for  effecting  a  saving  of  $3,800  at 
the  expense  of  the  staff.^     Mr.  Morley  continued  with 

*  Compare  also,  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  4,  1890, 
p.    1,774.     Mr.    Cunninghame-Grahame :     "I    beg    to    ask    the    Post- 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  159 

the  Statement  that  in  June,  1894,  a  deputation  from 
the  London  Trades  Council  had  complained  to  the  Post- 
master General  that  skilled  electric  light  men  were 
often  employed  by  the  Post  Office  at  laborer's  wages 
at  its  factory  at  Holloway,  citing  the  case  of  one 
Turner.  Upon  inquiry  the  Postmaster  General  had 
learned  that  Turner  had  been  employed  as  a  wire- 
man,  had  been  "discharged  from  slackness  of  work,'* 
and,  upon  his  own  request  in  writing,  had  been  taken 
back  "out  of  kindness"  as  a  laborer.  The  same  depu- 
tation had  mentioned  the  case  of  one  Harrison,  alleged 
to  be  earning  on  piece  work,  at  the  Holloway  Factor}'', 
$1.75,  $2.25,  and  $3.75  a  week.  On  inquiry  the 
Postmaster  had  ascertained  that  Harrison  was  able 
to  earn  $10  a  week  and  more,  but  that  "for  the  purpose 
of  agitation,  he  had  deliberately  lowered  the  amount 
of  his  wages  by  abstaining  from  doing  full  work." 
After  the  Postmaster  General  had  informed  the  Lon- 
don Trades  Council  of  the  facts  of  the  case,  that  body 
had  passed  resolutions  denouncing  the  postal  author- 
ities at  the  Holloway  Factories.  Again,  Mr.  Church - 
field,  Secretary  of  the  Postmen's  Federation,  in  an 
interview  with  the  representative  of  a  London  news- 
paper had  stated  that  the  shortest  time  worked  by 
the  men  on  split  duties  was  I2}i  hours,  while  the 
longest  was  22  hours  [in  the  course  of  one  day  and 

master  General  whether  it  is  the  custom  of  the  Post  Office  to  give 
bonuses  to  Inspectors  or  other  officials  for  cutting  down  working 
expenses,  and  whether  continual  complaints  are  being  made  of  the 
arbitrary  stoppage  of  payment  for  over  time?"  "No,"  was  answered 
to  both  questions. 


160  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

night].  A  duty  of  seven  hours  lasting  from  8  p.  m. 
to  10  p.  m.,  and  from  12  p.  m.  to  5  a.  m.,  Mr.  Church- 
field  had  called  a  continuous  duty  of  twenty-two 
hours,  lasting  from  12  p.  m.  to  10  p.  m.  The  pub- 
lic also  was  "grossly  misled"  as  to  the  condition  of  the 
auxiliary  postmen.  For  example,  one  Mears  was  al- 
leged to  earn,  after  27  years'  service,  only  $3  a  week. 
Inquiry  showed  that  Mears  worked  in  a  warehouse 
during  the  day,  and  received  from  the  Post  Office  $3 
a  week  for  duties  performed  between  the  hours  of  6 
p.  m.  and  10  p.  m.  Other  cases  had  been  reported,  but 
in  not  one  instance  had  the  figures  been  correct.  One 
man  in  receipt  of  $3.94  a  week,  had  been  put  down  at 
$2.62.  The  London  auxiliary  postmen  received  from 
12  cents  to  18  cents  an  hour;  they  were  mainly  small 
tradesmen,  shop  assistants,  and  private  watchmen.  In 
the  country,  the  auxiliary  postmen  received  from  8 
cents  to  10  cents  an  hour. 

The  Postmaster  General  continued  with  the  state- 
ment that  the  increases  in  wages  and  the  concessions 
granted  by  Mr.  Fawcett  and  Mr.  Raikes  had  aug- 
mented the  combined  expenditures  of  the  postal 
branch  and  telegraph  branch  by  $3,750,000  a  year.* 
"In    1 88 1,   the  wages   formed  48.7  per  cent,   of  the 

*  In  April,  1896,  Mr.  Lewin  Hill,  Assistant  Secretary  to  General 
Post  Office,  stated  that  on  the  basis  of  the  staff  of  1896,  the  Fawcett 
and  Raikes  schemes  were  costing  the  Post  Office  Department  $6,000,- 
000  a  year  in  increased  expenditure.  The  Postmaster  General's 
statement  of  an  increase  of  $3,750,000  in  the  expenditure  had  been 
made  on  the  basis  of  the  members  actually  employed  in  1881  and 
1891  respectively.  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee 
on  Post  Office  Establishments,  1897;  q.  12,382  and  15,123. 


I 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  161 

gross    expenditure,    whereas    now    they    formed    59.9 

per  cent He  did  not  think  that  he  need  add 

to  those  figures,  except  to  say  that  in  addition  to 
salaries  there  were  a  large  number  of  allowances  for 
special  duties.  In  the  circulation  ofhce  in  London  were 
4,000  sorters,  of  whom  250  had  each  an  allowance  of 
$2.50  a  week,  while  a  very  large  number  had  allowances 
of  $1.25,  $0.75  and  $0.50,  of  which  never  a  word  was 
said  when  complaints  were  made  about  salaries."  The 
demands  made  by  the  telegraphists  would  increase  the 
State's  expenditures  by  $3,250,000  a  year,  "taking 
into  account  the  consequential  advances  which  other 
classes  in  the  Public  Service,  treated  on  the  same  foot- 
ing, would  naturally  receive."  Similarly,  the  letter 
sorters  made  an  application  involving  a  direct  increase 
of  $635,000,  and  an  indirect  increase  of  another 
$2,500,000. 

Mr.  Morley  next  recited  some  statistics  to  show, 
"first  of  all,  the  desire  among  people  outside  to  come 
into  the  Post  Office  Service,  and  secondly,  the  disin- 
clination of  those  inside  to  go  out."  The  Post  Office 
recently  had  called  for  650  male  letter  sorters,  and  had 
received  1,506  applications.  A  call  for  188  "telegraph 
learners,"  had  brought  out  2,486  candidates.  In  Lon- 
don, in  1894,  there  had  been  no  resignations  among 
1,261  first  class  sorters,  and  23  resignations  among 
2,958  second  class  sorters.  Out  of  5,000  London  post- 
men, 19  had  resigned  in  1894;  and  in  the  5  years  end- 
ing with  1894,  a  total  of  5,700  telegraphists  had  fur- 
II 


162  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

nished  348  resignations,  including  the  resignations  of 
women  who  left  the  service  in  order  to  marry.^  "He 
could  not  help  thinking  that  when  the  working  men 
got  to  know  to  the  full  extent  the  terms  and  prospects 
of  Postal  Service,  the  sympathy  which  they  had  so 
freely  bestowed  on  Post  Office  employees  would  be 
largely  withdrawn." 

Mr.  Morley,  Postmaster  General,  summed  up  with 
the  statement  that  "he  should  be  the  last  to  deny  that 
change  and  amelioration  might  be  required  in  certain 
respects,  but,  having  examined  all  the  cases,  he  believed 
the  men  of  the  Postal  Service,  the  Telegraph  Staff  as 
well  as  the  Postal  Staff,  were  better  treated  than  peo- 
ple from  the  same  class  in  private  employment.  But 
that  opinion  was  not  altogether  shared  by  the  public, 
or  by  certain  Members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and 


*  Compare  Report  of  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post 
OMce  Establishments,  1897 ;  Mr.  Lewin  Hill,  Assistant  Secretary  to 
General  Post  Office;  q.  15,272. 

On  April  i,  1891,  there  were  employed  at  57  of  the  largest  post 
offices  in  the  United  Kingdom,  2,614  first  class  and  second  class 
male  letter  sorters.  In  the  next  5  years  there  resigned,  in  all,  95 
sorters.  Twelve  of  that  number  resigned  in  order  to  avoid  dis- 
missal. 

On  April  i,  1891,  there  were  employed  at  96  of  the  largest  tele- 
graph offices,  4,211  first  class  and  second  class  male  telegraphists. 
In  the  next  5  years  there  were  235  resignations.  Of  the  men  who 
resigned,  12  avoided  dismissal,  23  left  because  of  ill  health,  38  went 
to  South  Africa,  28  obtained  superior  appointments  in  the  Civil 
Service,  by  open  competition,  11  enlisted  with  the  Royal  Engineers, 
I  entered  the  service  of  an  electric  light  company,  i  became  a  bank 
clerk,  2  became  commercial  travelers,  3  went  to  sea,  4  emigrated  to 
the  United  States,  and  48  entered  the  service  of  the  British  Cable 
companies,  which  pay  higher  salaries  than  the  Post  Office,  but  work 
their  men  much  harder  and  demand  greater  efficiency  than  does  the 
Post  Office. 


I 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  163 

therefore  the  Government  was  prepared  to  appoint  a 

strong  Committee,  composed  of  men  who  would  have 

special    and    practical    knowledge    and 
The  Government  .  ....  .  .      , 

compromises         experience  of  admmistration,  and  who 

with  the  Civil  would,  he  hoped,  be  assisted  by  a 
Servants  Member  of  the  Labor  Department  of 

the  Board  of  Trade There  must  be  upon  the 

Committee  one  official  of  the  Post  Office  in  order  to 
assist  the  Committee,  but  apart  from  that  one  appoint- 
ment, he  proposed  that  the  Committee  should  be  ap- 
pointed from  executive  officers  of  the  Government  not 
connected  with  the  Post  Office." 

Sir  James  Fergusson,  who  had  preceded  Mr.  Morley 
as  Postmaster  General,  said:  "He  could  not  shut  his 
eyes  to  the  fact  that  there  was  no  difficulty  whatever 
in  finding  candidates  for  employment  in  the  Post 
Office.  In  fact,  it  was  impossible  to  meet  the  wishes 
of  many  of  those  who  desired  to  enter  the  Department. 
In  those  circumstances  he  thought  it  could  hardly  be 
contended  seriously  that  the  remuneration  offered  was 
grossly  inadequate,  or  that  the  conditions  of  service 
were  unduly  onerous." 

The  House  of  Commons  accepted  the  compromise 
offered  by  the  Government.  Lord  Tweedmouth,  Lord 
Privy  Seal  and  a  Member  of  the  Cabinet,  was  made 
Chairman  of  the  Committee,  which  consisted,  in  addi- 
tion, of  Sir  F.  Mowatt,  Permanent  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury;  Sir  A.  Godley,  Under  Secretary  of  State 
for  India ;  Mr.  Spencer  Walpole,  Permanent  Secretary 


164  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

to  the  Post  Office;  and  Mr.  Llewellyn  Smith,  of  the 
Labor  Department  of  the  Board  of  Trade. ^ 

*  Report    of   the   Inter-Departmental   Committee    on    Post    OMce 
Establishments,  1897,  is  the  official  title  of  the  Committee's  Report. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE   TWEEDMOUTH    COMMITTEE   REPORT 

The  Government  accepts  all  recommendations  made  by  the 
Committee.  Sir  Albert  K.  Rollit,  one  of  the  principal  champions 
in  the  House  of  Commons  of  the  postal  employees,  immediately 
follows  with  a  motion  "intended  to  reflect  upon  the  Report  of  the 
Tweedmouth  Committee."  Mr.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary 
to  the  Treasury,  intimates  that  it  may  become  necessary  to  dis- 
franchise the  civil  servants.  The  Treasury  accepts  the  recom- 
mendations of  the  so-called  Norfolk-Hanbury  Committee.  The 
average  of  expenses  on  account  of  wages  and  salaries  rises  from 
11.54  cents  per  telegram  in  1895-96,  to  13.02  cents  in  1902-03, 
concomitantly  with  an  increase  in  the  number  of  telegrams  from 
79,423,000  to  92,471,000. 

In  the  preceding  chapter  the  narrative  was  brought 
down  to  the  appointment  in  1895,  of  the  so-called 
Tweedmouth  Committee.^  That  Committee  consisted 
of  Lord  Tweedmouth,  Lord  Privy  Seal  and  a  Member 
of  the  Cabinet;  Sir  F.  Mowatt,  Permanent  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury;  Sir  A.  Godley,  Under  Secretary  of 
State  for  India;  Mr.  Spence  Walpole,  Permanent  Sec- 
retary of  the  Post  Office;  and  Mr.  Llewellyn  Smith, 
of  the  Labor  Department  of  the  Board  of  Trade. 

In  the  "Terms  of  Reference  to  the  Committee  on 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  "Office 
Establishments,  1897,  is  the  official  title  of  the  Committee's  Report. 

165 


166  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Post  Office  Establishments/'  the  Postmaster  General 
included  this  paragraph :  "In  conducting  this  inquiry, 
I  can  have  no  doubt  you  will  recollect  that  the  Post 
Office  is  a  great  Revenue  Department ;  and  that,  in  the 
words  of  the  Select  Committee  on  Revenue  Depart- 
ments Estimates  in  1888,  it  *is  most  likely  to  continue 
to  be  conducted  satisfactorily,  if  it  should  also  continue 
to  be  conducted  with  a  view  to  profit,  as  one  of  the 
Revenue  yielding  Departments  of  the  State.'  "^ 

Before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee  Mr.  Lewin  Hill, 
who,  as  Assistant  Secretary  General  Post  Office,  was 
the  executive  officer  who  had  general  charge  of  all  the 
postal  and  telegraph  employees  outside  of  London, 
testified  as  follows :  "My  own  view  is  that  the  time  has 
come  for  telling  the  postmen,  in  common  with  the  mem- 
bers of  the  rest  of  the  manipulative  staff  [the  teleg- 
raphists] in  answer  to  their  demand  for  a  general  rise 
of  wages,  that  the  Post  Office  Department  is  satisfied 
that  the  wages  already  paid  are  in  excess  of  the  mar- 
ket value  of  their  services;  that  this  being  so,  no  gen- 
eral addition  to  pay  will  be  given,  and  that  if  the  staff 
are  dissatisfied,  and  can  do  better  for  themselves  out- 
side the  Post  Office,  they  are,  as  they  know,  at  perfect 
liberty  to  seek  employment  elsewhere."  The  Chair- 
man, Lord  Tweedmouth,  asked  Mr.  Hill:  "Do  you 
think  there  is  any  other  particular  class  of  employment 
which  is  comparable  with  that  of  the  postmen   [and 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897,  p.  4. 


p 


THE  TWEEDMOUTH  COMMITTEE  REPORT      167 

telegraphists]  ?"  Mr.  Hill  replied  :  "I  thought  of  rail- 
way servants,  whose  work  in  many  ways  resembles 
the  work  of  our  employees.  If  they  have  not  the  same 
permanence  [of  tenure]  as  our  own  people  have,  they 
No  Service  like  ^^^^  continuous  employment  so  long 
the  Public  as  they  are  efficient,   but  our  people 

Service  i  have  continuous  employment  whether 
they  are  efficient  or  not ....  In  that  respect  all  of 
us  in  the  Postal  Service  stand  in  a  unique  position, 
from  top  to  bottom  our  men  are  certain  as  long  as  they 
conduct  themselves  reasonably  well  to  retain  their 
maximum  pay  down  to  the  last  day  they  remain  in  the 
Service,  and  whatever  their  class  may  be,  whether  post- 
men, or  sorting  clerks,  or  telegraphists,  or  officers  of 
higher  grade,  they  continue,  failing  misconduct,  to  rise 
to  the  maximum  pay  of  their  class,  quite  regardless  of 
whether  they  are  worth  the  higher  pay  that  they  get 
from  year  to  year."  The  only  concession  that  Mr.  Hill 
was  willing  to  recommend  was,  that  in  the  larger 
towns  the  time  required  for  postmen  and  telegraph- 
ists to  rise  from  the  minimum  scale  of  pay  to  the  maxi- 
mum be  reduced  from  13  years  to  6  years.^ 

Mr.  J.  C.  Badcock,  Controller  of  the  Metropolitan 
Postal  Service  other  than  the  Service  in  the  London 
Central  Post  Office,  and  Mr.  H.  C.  Fischer,  Controller 
of  the  London  Central  Post  Office,  joined  in  Mr.  Lewin 


^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  Q-  iS.nQ  and  following,  11,706,  11,694,  15.123, 
11,642  to  11,648,  11,680  to  11,697,  ii»774  and  11,805. 


168  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Hill's  recommendation.  Mr.  Fischer  added  that  the 
London  telegraphists  should  be  given  better  chances  of 
passing  from  the  second  class  to  the  first  class  than  they 
had  enjoyed  in  the  last  three  or  four  years/  and  that 
the  pay  of  the  London  senior  telegraphists,  who  were 
a  kind  of  assistants  to  the  assistant  superintendents, 
ought  to  be  raised  above  the  existing  scale  of  $950. 

Mr.  C.  H.  Kerry,  Postmaster  at  Stoke-on-Trent, 
stated  that  if  the  Post  Office  Department  "was  willing 
to  act,  not  only  the  part  of  the  model  employer,  but  of 
an  exceptionally  liberal  employer:  and  it  was  thought 
after  all  that  had  been  done  for  the  staff  so  recently, 
that  still  a  little  further  should  be  done,"  the  Depart- 
ment might  reduce  from  13  years  to  5  years  the 
period  that  it  took  the  rank  and  file  to  pass  from  the 
minimum  salary  of  their  class  to  the  maximum  salary. 
But  there  was  no  necessity  of  doing  anything  for  any 
one,  "on  a  general  consideration  of  the  pay  given  else- 
where to  persons  performing  duties  requiring  about 
the  same  amount  of  intelligence."  There  was  "abso- 
lutely no  justification"  for  increasing  the  existing 
maximum  of  pay. 

Mr.  Kerry  had  entered  the  Post  Office  telegraph 
service  in  1870,  after  having  served  with  the  Electric 
and  International  Company  from  1854  to  1870.  He 
said :  "The  speed  at  which  the  telegraphists  had  to  work 


^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  4,183  to  4,185,  3,907  to  3,912,  3,868  to  3,879 
and  4,140  to  4,149. 


THE  TWEEDMOUTH  COMMITTEE  REPORT     169 

in  the  old  service  was  much  higher  than  the  speed  at 
present,  that  is  the  speed  per  man/  because  the  tele- 
graph companies  kept  only  enough  force  for  the  mini- 
mum work,  and  when  the  work  increased  you  had  to 

catch  that  up  by  increased  effort As  a  previous 

witness  said,  one  of  the  laws  of  the  service  is  that  there 
must  be  no  delay,  but  I  think  there  is  a  well  understood 
law,  also,  that  there  must  be  no  confusion,  and  the 
arrangements  made  are  now  such  that  the  maximum 
of  work,  as  a  rule,  can  be  dealt  with  without  undue 

pressure From    1870  to   1889,  I   was   constantly 

in  the  Telegraph  branch  and  witnessing  from  day  to 
day,  and  almost  from  hour  to  hour,  the  work  which  the 
telegraphists  performed."  .  .  .  .^ 

This  testimony  from  Mr.  Kerry  must  be  borne  in 
mind  when  reading  the  complaints  of  the  Post  Office 
telegraphists  that  the  salaries  paid  by  the  Eastern  Tele- 
graph [Cable]  Company  rise  to  $1,020  a  year,  where- 
as the  salaries  of  first  class  telegraphists  in  London  rise 
only  to  $950.  The  employees  of  the  Eastern  Tele- 
graph Company  have  to  work  under  so  much  greater 
pressure  than  the  State  telegraphists,  that  Mr.  Fischer, 
Controller  of  the  London  Central  Telegraph  Office, 
was  able  to  state :  "I  have  never  known  a  telegraphist 
in  the  first  class  to  leave  our  service  for  that  of  any  of 
the    [Cable]    companies.     The  cable  companies  draw 

^  Mr.  Kerry  probably  meant  that  the  employees  of  the  companies 
worked  under  greater  pressure. 

''Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  6,747  and  following,  and  6,691  to  6,694. 


170  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

very  few  men  from  us,  and  those  drawn  away  as  a 
rule,  are  young  men  in  the  secoi.d  class  who  are  re- 
ceiving about  $250  or  $300,  and  are  attracted  by  the 
prospect  of  an  immediate  increase  of  some  $150  upon 
entrance  into  the  service  of  the  cable  companies."^ 

Those  telegraph  offices  which  are  not  sufficiently 
important  to  justify  the  employment  of  telegraphists 
of  the  first  class,  are  divided  into  four  groups :  B,  C,  D 
and  E.  The  Tweedmouth  Committee  recommended 
that  the  maximum  salary  of  the  telegraphists  in  the 
,The  Tweedmouth  0^^^^  of  group  E  be  raised  from  $8 
Committee's  Rec-  a  week  to  $8.50:  in  offices  of  group  D 
ommendations         ^^^^  ^g^^   ^^  ^^.  j^^  ^^^^^  ^f  ^^^^^ 

C  from  $9.50  to  $10;  and  in  offices  of  group  B  from 
$10  to  $1 1.  It  recommended  furthermore  that  all  pro- 
vincial telegraphists  should  rise  automatically  and 
without  regard  to  efficiency,  to  a  salary  of  not  less  than 
$10  a  week.  Beyond  $10  they  should  not  go,  unless 
fully  competent.  The  Committee  added  that  it  placed 
"the  efficiency  bar  at  the  high  figure  of  $10  a  week,^  for 
.the  special  reason  that  it  may  be  rigorously  enforced, 


^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897 ;  q.  3,863  and  3,853. 

*  Compare :  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to 
inquire  into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888,  p.  xvi.  In  1888  the 
salaries  of  the  Lower  Division  Clerks  of  the  Civil  Service  ranged 
from  $475  to  $1,250.  The  Royal  Commission  recommended  that 
in  the  future  the  salaries  in  question  should  range  from  $350  to 
$1,750,  with  an  efficiency  bar  at  $500  at  the  end  of  seven  years* 
service,  and  a  second  efficiency  bar  at  $950  at  the  end  of  nineteen 
years'   service. 


THE  TWEEDMOUTH  COMMITTEE  REPORT      171 

and  that  all  inducements  to  treat  it  as  a  matter  of  form, 
liable  to  be  abrogated  for  the  reason  of  compassion, 
may  be  removed." 

As  for  the  telegraphists  employed  in  Metropolitan 
London,  the  Tweedmouth  Committee  recommended 
that  all  telegraphists  should  rise  at  least  to  "the  effi- 
ciency bar"  of  $560  a  year;  and  that  those  who  could 
pass  the  efficiency  bar,  should  rise  automatically  to 
$800,  the  maximum  salary  of  first  class  telegraph- 
ists. In  the  past,  telegraphists  in  London  had  been 
promoted  from  the  second  class  to  the  first  class,  only 
upon  the  occurrence  of  vacancies.  In  this  case,  also, 
the  Committee  added  to  its  recommendation  the  words : 
"This  efficiency  bar  has  been  placed  at  the  high  figure 
of  $560  for  the  special  reason  that  it  may  be  rigorously 
enforced,  and  that  all  inducements  to  treat  it  as  a  mat- 
ter of  form,  liable  to  be  abrogated  for  reasons  of  com- 
passion, may  be  removed."^ 

These  recommendations  the  Tweedmouth  Commit- 
tee made  in  order  to  meet  the  complaints  advanced  by 
the  Post  Office  employees  that  the  falling  off  in  the 
rate  of  increase  of  the  business  of  the  telegraph  branch 
had  caused  a  slackening  in  the  flow  of  promotion. 

The  remaining  recommendations  of  the  Tweed- 
mouth Committee  It  is  not  necessary  to  enumerate; 
suffice  it  to  say,  that  the  Postmaster  General,  the  Duke 


*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897,  pp.  9,  11  and  1,088;  and  q.  4,256  and  following, 
4,161  to  4.162,  15,126  to  I5.i34>  and  3,913  *©  3>937» 


172  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

of  Norfolk,  advised  the  Government  to  accept  all  of 
the  Committee's  recommendations,  with  the  statement 
that,  on  the  basis  of  the  staff  of  1897,  the  cost  of  carry- 
ing out  the  recommendations  would  begin  with  $695,- 
000  a  year,  and  would  rise  ultimately  to  $1,375,000. 
That  estimate  related  to  both  branches  of  the  Post 
Office,  the  postal  branch  and  the  telegraph ;  no  separate 
estimates  were  made  for  the  several  branches. 

The  Lords  Commissioners  of  Her  Majesty's  Treas- 

^,    ^  ury  accepted  the  Postmaster  General's 

The  Government 

accepts  the  Com-   recommendations,  and  directed  the  Fi- 
mittee's  Recom-     nancial  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Mr. 
R.  W.  Hanbury,  to  write  as  follows  to 
the  Postmaster  General. 

"It  has,  of  course,  been  necessary  for  my  Lords  to 
consider  very  carefully  proposals  involving  so  large  an 
increase  of  expenditure  in  a  single  Department  at  one 
time,  and  they  have  duly  weighed  the  reasons  which 
the  Committee  adduces  in  support  of  its  conclusions. 
While  many  of  the  proposals  appear  to  be  abundant- 
ly justified  by  the  considerations  put  forward,  there  are 
others  which  my  Lords  w^ould  have  hesitated  to  accept 
on  any  authority  less  entitled  to  respect  than  that  by 
which  they  are  supported.  But,  my  Lords  readily 
acknowledge  the  exceptional  competence  of  the  Com- 
mittee to  pronounce  a  judgment  on  the  question  which 
came  before  it,  and  the  great  care  with  which  the  in- 
quiry has  been  conducted.  They  also  note  that  the 
conclusions  represent  the  unanimous  opinion  of  the 


THE  TWEEDMOUTH  COMMITTEE  REPORT      173 

Committee,  and  that  they  are,  in  all  cases,  endorsed  by 
your  Grace.  They  have  therefore  decided,  in  view  of 
the  weight  of  authority  by  which  your  recommenda- 
tions are  supported,  to  accept  them  as  they  stand,  and 
they  authorize  you  to  give  effect  to  them  as  from  the 
first  of  April  next.  They  have  adopted  this  course 
from  a  strong  desire  to  do  full  justice  to  one  of  the 
largest  and  most  important  services  of  the  State,  and 
because  they  feel  that  the  settlement  now  effected  must 
be  accepted  as  permanently  satisfying  all  reasonable 
claims  on  the  part  of  the  classes  included  in  its  terms. 
The  only  condition  which  my  Lords  desire  to  attach  to 
their  acceptance  of  your  proposals  is  that  the  annual 
increments  of  pay  should,  in  all  cases,  be  dependent  on 
the  certificate  of  a  superior  officer,  that  the  conduct  of 
the  recipient  during  the  preceding  year  has  been  satis- 
factory." 

The  recommendations  of  the  Tweedmouth  Commit- 
tee went  into  effect  on  April  i,  1897.  On  July  16, 
1897,  while  the  House  of  Commons  was  in  Committee 
of  Supply,  Sir  Albert  K.  RoUit  moved  the  reduction  of 

o.    ^   rr  r,  ,r-     thc  Salary  of  the  Postmaster  General  by 

Sir  A.  K.  Rolht  •' 

demands  a  Com-  ^S^ooo}     Sir  Albert  Rollit  said :  "The 

mittee  of  Bust-      Amendment    was    intended    to    reflect 

upon  the  report  of  the  Tweedmouth 

Committee,  rather  than  upon  either  the  Government 

or  the  Post  Office  Department,  for  he  thought  more 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  16,  1897,  p.  323  and 
following. 


174  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

might  be  done  to  remedy  the  abuses  which  were  known 
[shown?]  to  exist  in  the  course  of  the  report  itself. 
To  speak  of  the  Post  Office  as  a  revenue  earning  ma- 
chine was,  in  his  opinion,  not  a  full  or  adequate  descrip- 
tion. He  shared  to  the  full  the  opinion  that  its  first 
object  was  to  give  facilities  to  the  public  rather  than 
merely  to  earn  profits,  and  also  to  do  justice  to  its 

employees There    were    grievances    which    had 

not  been  redressed  by  the  report,  and  the  House  had  a 
great  deal  more  to  do  in  that  direction.  It  was  no 
answer  to  say  that  the  Treasury  had  appropriated  a 
large  sum  of  $695,000  for  that  very  purpose,  for  after 
all,  what  did  the  appropriation  amount  to?  It  only 
amounted  to  a  rectification  of  the  inadequacies  of  the 
•past.  It  was  not  in  London  alone,  but  throughout  the 
United  Kingdom,  that  something  like  chronic  discon- 
tent existed.  The  complaints  were  loud  and  wide- 
spread. He  did  not  at  all  agree  as  to  the  propriety 
of  the  course  intimated  [by  the  telegraphists]  by  way 
of  notice  to  the  Postmaster  General,  that  if  the  griev- 
ances were  not  redressed,  over-time  work  at  night 
would  be  suspended  [i.  e.  the  telegraphists  would  re- 
fuse to  work  over  time  in  order  to  compel  the  Govern- 
ment to  redress  their  grievances].  That  was  an  ex- 
treme remedy  in  cases  where  the  public  convenience 
and  service  were  concerned ;  but,  after  all,  every  man's 
labor  was  his  own  right,  and  if  there  were  no  disposi- 
tion to  remedy  present  grievances,  even  that  extreme 
way  of  trying  to  bring  about  a  remedy  might  possibly 


THE  TWEEDMOUTH  COMMITTEE  REPORT      175 

have  to  be  resorted  to.  The  Treasury  was,  of  course, 
a  barrier  to  a  good  deal.  He  did  not  say  the  heads  of 
a  Department  did  not  value  as  much  as  he  might  do 
pecuniarily  the  services  of  those  who  contributed  to  the 
joint  effect  which  he  and  they  made  for  the  public  ad- 
vantage, and  if  we  had  a  splendid  Civil  Service  in  this 
country,  he  thought  it  had  one  great  defect,  and  that 
was  too  glaring  disproportion  between  the  salaries  of 
the  highest  officials  and  those  of  the  lower,  and  this 
proportion  might  well  be  redressed." 

Sir  Albert  Rollit  said  he  could  not  enumerate  all  the 
grievances,  he  would  have  to  confine  himself  to  the 
enumeration  of  the  worst  ones.  He  began  by  endors- 
ing the  contention  of  the  telegraphists  that  everybody 
should  rise  automatically  to  a  salary  of  $i,ooo  a  year. 
The  establishment  of  the  "efficiency  bars"  he  said,  "was 
really  a  violation  of  the  contract  with  the  telegraph 
operators,  and  was  a  grave  and  gross  injustice  to 
them."  He  maintained,  also,  that  the  Committee's 
recommendation  that  the  payment  for  Sunday  labor 
be  reduced  from  double  rates  to  a  rate  and  a  half  was 
"a  material  alteration  of  the  contract  under  which  serv- 
ants entered  the  Department."  He  supported  the  con- 
tention of  the  State  employees  that  it  was  a  grievance 
that  some  of  the  employees  had  to  take  their  annual 
vacation  in  the  winter  months.  "The  postmen  had 
asked  that  the  Christmas  boxes  [contributions  from 
the  public]  be  abolished,  $26  a  year  being  added  to  the 
wages  as  a  compromise.     Evidence  had  been  given 


176  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

that  $1.25  a  year  was  the  real  value  of  the  Christmas 
boxes,  but  the  Committee  said  there  should  be  no  solici- 
tation for  Christmas  boxes,  and  no  compensation  for 
their  loss."  He  hoped  that  a  statement  of  grievances, 
which  were  provoking  the  strongest  possible  feeling, 
with  disadvantage  to  the  efficiency  of  the  Post  Office, 
would  be  listened  to.  He  was  extremely  glad  to  recog- 
nize that  the  Postmaster  General  had  been  willing  to 
receive  two  deputations — one  on  June  15,  which  had 
not  yet  been  replied  to,  and  one  yesterday.  But  he 
would  urge  upon  the  Department  and  the  Government 
that  the  real  remedy  for  this  strong  and  wide  discon- 
tent was  the  appointment  of  an  independent  Commit- 
tee, because  the  decision  of  such  a  tribunal  composed 
not  of  officials,  but  of  practical  business  men,  who 
would  perhaps  have  more  sympathy  with  men  in  the 
lower  grades  of  the  service,  would  be  loyally  accepted, 
and  thus  the  public  would  be  advantaged  and  content- 
ment restored  to  a  service  which  was  of  great  value  to 
the  country."  ["Hear,  hear."] 

Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  who,  as  Financial  Secretary  to 
the  Treasury,  represented  in  the  House  of  Commons 
the  Postmaster  General,  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  replied : 
"that  throughout  the  discussion  some  facts  had  been 
more  or  less  left  out  of  sight.  Honorable  Members 
ought  to  recollect,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  Tweed- 
mouth  Committee  gave  universal  satisfaction  when  it 
was  appointed.  It  was  then  agreed  that  it  was  the  right 
kind  of  Committee;  and  that  the  right  kind  of  men 


THE  TWEEDMOUTH  COMMITTEE  REPORT      177 

were  appointed  to  serve  upon  it.  There  was  no  pre- 
ponderance of  Treasury  opinion  upon  the  Committee. 
In  fact,  the  only  Treasury  official  sitting  upon  it  was 
Sir  Francis  Mowatt.  There  was  on  it  a  high  repre- 
sentative of  the  Post  Office,  and  the  officials  of  a  De- 
partment were  not  as  a  rule  anxious  to  cut  down  the 
salaries  of  their  subordinates.  Their  tendency  would 
rather  be  to  recommend  an  increase  in  salaries.  There 
was  also  on  the  Committee  a  representative  of  the  La- 
bor Department  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  who  was  par- 
ticularly well  qualified  to  give  an  opinion  as  to  the 
proportion  which  the  wages  of  the  postal  and  telegraph 
employees  bore  to  the  wages  of  persons  doing  corre- 
sponding work  outside  the  Post  Office.  Therefore  the 
Committee  was  a  very  efficient  body,  and  through  its 
recommendations  the  salaries  of  the  officials  had  al- 
ready been  increased  by  $700,000  a  year,  and  the  in- 
crease would  amount  to  something  like  $1,250,000  a 
year  in  the  next  few  years.  The  Treasury  had  accepted 
every  recommendation  of  the  Committee,  whose  sug- 
gestions had  been  adopted  wholesale.  There  was  no 
ground  for  complaint,  therefore,  in  that  direction." 

"Another  fact  which  Members  ought  not  to  over- 
look was  the  political  pressure  which  was  far  too  fre- 
quently exercised  by  Civil  Servants  upon  those  who 
also  represented  them."  ["Hear,  hear."]  "That  was 
a  great  and  growing  danger.  It  was  chiefly  in  Lon- 
don that  this  pressure  was  brought  to  bear He 

would  give  an  instance  of  the  way  in  which  these  Civil 
12 


178  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Servants  spoke  of  the  expediency  of  political  pressure. 
At  one  of  the  great  meetings  which  had  been  held,  a 
speaker  said  there  were  8,0(X)  postmen  in  London,  and 
that  he  hoped  every  one  would  have  his  name  upon  the 
register  [of  voters] ,  so  that  at  election  times  they  could 
exercise  their  influence  upon  candidates  and  advocate 
the  cause  of  higher  wages.  He  was  of  the  opinion 
that  political  pressure  ought  not  to  be  brought  to  bear 
in  that  way."  ["Hear,  hear."]  "Ordinary  workmen 
could  not  exercise  the  same  power,  but  Civil  Servants 
could,  and,  whether  their  agitation  succeeded  or  not, 
their  position  was  secure,  so  that  it  was  a  case  of 
'Heads,  I  win ;  tails,  I  don't  lose' ....  Before  the  Royal 
Commission  [of  1888],  which  had  inquired  into  the 
Civil  Service  establishments,  evidence  was  given  with 
regard  to  the  way  in  which  pressure  was  brought  to 

Disfranchisement  ^^^^  ^"  ^^^^^^^  constituencies  upon 
of  Civil  Servants  Members,  and  he  thought  that  the  al- 
Suggested  j^^g^.  unanimous  feeling  of  the  Com- 

mission was  that,  if  this  state  of  things  continued,  it 
would  be  necessary  to  disfranchise  the  Civil  Service." 
["Hear,  hear."]i 

*  Compare  also  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  9,  1896, 
p.  597,  Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury :  "He  had  sat  for  some  years  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Royal  Commission  upon  Civil  Service  Establishments, 
and  the  Members  of  that  Commission  had  been  greatly  struck  by 
the  enormous  pressure  that  civil  servants  in  particular  constituencies 
were  able  to  bring  to  bear  upon  candidates,  and  in  his  view  the 
House  ought  not  to  adopt  any  line  of  action  that  would  encourage 
that  pressure  being  brought  into  operation.  So  great,  indeed,  had 
been  the  abuses  that  it  had  even  been  suggested  that  civil  servants 

ought   to  be   disfranchised   altogether Another   great  danger 

that  had  to  be  provided  against  was  that  in  certain   London  con- 


THE  TWEEDMOUTH  COMMITTEE  REPORT      179 

Sir  Albert  Rollit  replied :  "They  had  to  acknowledge 
a  very  sympathetic  speech  from  the  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury.  Perhaps  if  some  honorable  Members  went 
to  the  Treasury  in  regard  to  this  matter,  accompanied 
by  one  person  who  might  represent  practically  the 
views  which  were  entertained  by  those  concerned,  the 
matter  might  be  further  gone  into.  He  begged  leave 
to  withdraw  his  Amendment." 

The  Secretary  to  the  Treasury  replied :  "There  was 
no  objection  on  the  part  of  the  Treasury  to  hearing 
communications  from  Members  of  Parliament  on  the 
subject,  but  with  regard  to  officials  of  the  Post  Office 
coming  to  the  Treasury,  he  should  not  like  to  give  any 
pledge  without  first  consulting  with  the  Postmaster 
General." 

Shortly  afterward  the  Postmaster  General,  the  Duke 
of  Norfolk,  and  the  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treas- 
ury, Mr.  Hanbury,  constituted  themselves  a  Committee 
to  investigate  the  grievances  that  the  Tweedmouth 
Committee  had  left  unredressed.  All  Members  of  the 
The  Norfolk-  House  of  Commons  were  invited  to  at- 
HanburyCom-  tend*  the  meetings  of  the  Norfolk- 
mittee  Hanbury  Committee,  and  to  take  part 

in  examining  the  witnesses.  Sir  Albert  Rollit  pre- 
sented the  case  of  the  Post  Office  employees.     The 

stituencies,  and  in  some  of  the  large  towns,  it  was  quite  possible 
that  the  civil  servants  might,  by  combining  together,  succeed  in 
turning  the  balance  at  an  election  in  the  event  of  one  of  the  candi- 
dates refusing  to  pledge  himself  with  regard  to  raising  the  scale  of 
wage,  or  an  increase  in  the  amount  of  pensions,  or  similar  advantages 
which  the  civil  servants  might  desire  to  obtain," 


180  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Norfolk-Hanbury  Committee  recommended  further 
concessions  involving  an  additional  outlay  of  $400,000 
a  year;  and  the  Treasury  accepted  the  recommenda- 
tions. 

The  Report  of  the  Postmaster  General  for  the  year 
1897-98  stated  that  the  concessions  granted  would  en- 
tail a  total  increase  of  expenditure  of  $1,940,000  a 
year.  The  Duke  of  Norfolk  concluded  his  reference 
to  the  foregoing  episodes  with  the  words :  "Since  that 
time  I  have  declined,  and  I  shall  continue  to  decline, 
to  allow  decisions  which  have  been  considered  by  the 
Tweedmouth  Committee,  and  which  have  been  revised 
by  Mr.  Hanbury  and  myself,  to  be  reopened.  It  is  my 
belief  that  those  decisions  have  been  liberal,  but  whether 
they  are  liberal  or  not,  it  is  for  the  interest  of  all  par- 
ties that  it  should  be  understood  that  they  are  final." 

In  April,  1900,  Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  Financial  Sec- 
retary to  the  Treasury,  stated  the  concessions  granted 
by  the  Tweedmouth  and  Norfolk-Hanbury  Commit- 
tees were  costing  $2,200,000  a  year.  In  April,  1901, 
Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Financial  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury,  said  they  were  costing  $2,500,000  a  year; 
and  in  April,  1903,  he  stated  that  they  were  costing 
$3,000,000  a  year.^  Those  figures  related  to  the  com- 
bined postal  and  telegraph  service.  So  far  as  the 
latter  service  alone  is  concerned,  the  average  expenses 
on  account  of  wages  and  salaries  rose  steadily  from 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  27,  igoo,  p.  135; 
April  2$,  1901,  p.  1,325  ;  and  April  30,  1903,  p.  1,022. 


( 


THE  TWEEDMOUTH  COMMITTEE  REPORT     181 

11.54  cents  per  telegram  in  1895-96,  to  13.02  cents  in 
1902-03,  under  an  increase  in  the  number  of  messages 
from  79,423,000  in  1895-96,  to  92,471,000  in  1902-03. 
In  1905-06,  the  average  in  question  rose  to  14.29  cents, 
partly  in  consequence  of  the  increases  in  wages  made 
in  response  to  the  demands  of  the  Civil  Servants,  partly 
in  consequence  of  the  drop  in  the  number  of  telegrams 
to  89,478,000 — as  a  result  of  the  growing  competition 
from  the  telephone. 

In  1895-96  the  receipts  of  the  Telegraph  Department 
proper  exceeded  the  operating  expenses  by  $646,000; 
in  1900-01,  the  operating  expenses  exceeded  the  re- 
ceipts by  $34,000;  in  1903-04  the  deficit  rose  to  $1,- 
505,000,  and  in  1904-05  it  was  $917,000.  In  1905- 
06,  the  gross  revenue  exceeded  the  operating  expenses 
by  $63,500.1 

^Report  of  the  Postmaster  General,  1906. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE  POST  OFFICE  EMPLOYEES  CONTINUE  TO  PRESS 

THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  FOR  INCREASES  OF 

WAGES  AND  SALARIES 

The  Post  Office  employees  demand  "a  new  judgment  on  the 
old  facts."  Mr.  S.  Woods'  Motion,  in  February,  1898.  Mr. 
Steadman's  Motions  in  February  and  June,  1899.  Mr.  Hanbury, 
Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  points  out  that  the  postal 
employees  are  demanding  a  House  of  Commons  Select  Com- 
mittee because  under  such  a  Committee  "the  agitation  and  pres- 
sure, now  distributed  over  the  whole  House,  would  be  focussed 
and  concentrated  upon  the  unfortunate  members  of  the  Select 
Committee."  Mr.  Steadman's  Motion,  in  April,  1900.  Mr.  Bay- 
ley's  Motion,  in  June,  1901.  Mr.  Balfour,  Prime  Minister,  con- 
fesses that  the  debate  has  filled  him  "with  considerable  anxiety 
as  to  the  future  of  the  public  service  if  pressure  of  the  kind 
which  has  been  put  upon  the  Government  to-night  is  persisted  in 
by  the  House."  Captain  Norton's  Motion,  in  April,  1902.  The 
Government  compromises  by  appointing  the  Bradford  Committee 
of  business  men.  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Postmaster  General, 
states  that  members  from  both  sides  of  the  House  "seek  from  him, 
in  his  position  as  Postmaster  General,  protection  for  them  in  the 
discharge  of  their  public  duties  against  the  pressure  sought  to  be 
put  upon  them  by  employees  of  the  Post  Office."  He  adds: 
"Even  if  the  machinery  by  which  our  Select  Committees  are  ap- 
pointed were  such  as  would  enable  us  to  secure  a  Select  Com- 
mittee composed  of  thoroughly  impartial  men  who  had  committed 
themselves  by  no  expression  of  opinion,  I  still  think  that  it  would 
not  be  fair  to  pick  out  fifteen  members  of  this  House  and  make 
them  marked  men  for  the  purpose  of  such  pressure  as  is  now 
distributed  more  or  less  over  the  whole  Assembly." 

182 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  183 

On  February  i8,  1898,  in  the  House  of  Commons, 

Mr.  S.  Woods^   moved:  "And  we  humbly  represent 

to  Your  Majesty  that  your  servants  in  the  Post  Office 

are  not  permitted  to  exercise  the  franchise,  generally 

allowed  to  other  Departm'ents   in  the   State;   nor  to 

^,  .J  c  ^  serve  on  electoral  committees:  nor  to 
Ctvtl  Servants 

demand  Right  take  part  in  political  agitation ;  and  are 
to  agitate  otherwise  deprived  of  the  privileges  of 

citizenship  in  defiance  of  the  letter  and  spirit  of  the 
law ;  that  the  officials  of  the  Post  Office  refuse  to  recog- 
nize the  Postmen's  Trade  Union;  their  officials  are 
illegally  and  unjustly  dismissed  for  circularizing  Par- 
liamentary Candidates;  and  we  humbly  beg  Your 
Majesty  to  instruct  the  Postmaster  General  to  remedy 
these  grievances.  "2 

Sir  James  Fergusson,  a  former  Postmaster  General, 
said  Mr.  Woods'  motion  had  been  brought  "by  the 
direction  of  the  central  Committee  of  the  Postal  Union, 
or  some  such  party."  He  continued  with  the  state- 
ment that  the  motion  was  the  outcome  of  the  agitation 
carried  on  since  he.  Sir  James  Fergusson,  had  dis- 
missed from  the  Post  Office  service  Messrs.  Clery  and 
Cheesem'an,  the  ringleaders  of  a  political  campaign 
carried  on  in  violation  of  Sir  James  Fergusson's  order 


*  Who's  Who,  1903,  Woods,  Sam'l.,  M.  P.  for  S.  W.  Lancashire, 
1892  to  1895;  M.  P.  (R.)  for  Walthamstow,  Essex,  1897  to  1900; 
President  of  Lancashire  Miners'  Federation ;  Vice-President  of 
Miners'  Federation  of  Great  Britain ;  Secretary  of  Trade  Union 
Congress  since  1894. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  February  18,  1898,  p.  1,107 
and  following. 


184  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

of  June  17,  1892.  He  said  the  employees  in  the 
Revenue  Departments  had  been  disfranchised  in  1782 
by  the  Marquis  of  Rockingham,  Prime  Minister,  but 
that  the  franchise  had  been  restored  to  them  in  1868. 
That  in  that  year  both  Mr.  DisraeH  and  Mr.  Gladstone 
had  approved  the  policy  of  enfranchising  the  employees 
of  the  Revenue  Departments,  subject  to  the  limitation 
that  the  ministerial  heads  of  the  Departments  were  to 
have  the  power  to  determine  the  limits  within  which 
the  employees  were  to  take  an  active  part  in  politics. 
That  an  attempt  had  been  made  in  1874  to  remove 
that  limitation,  but  that  the  House  had  supported  the 
Government  of  the  day  in  resisting  the  attempt.^ 

Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury,  and  representative  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons of  the  Postmaster  General,  the  Duke  of  Norfolk, 
said,  in  the  course  of  his  reply  to  Mr.  Woods:  "We 
must  recognize  the  fact  that  in  this  House  of  Com- 
mons, public  servants  have  a  Court  of  Appeal  such  as 

-,  ^  ^  exists  with  regard  to  no  private  em- 

House  of  Com-  ^  ^ 

mons  is  Civil  ployee  whatever.  It  is  a  Court  of  Ap- 
Servants'  Court  peal  which  not  Only  exists  with  regard 
to  the  grievances  of  classes,  and  even 
of  individuals,  but  it  is  a  Court  of  Appeal  which  applies 
even  to  the  wages  and  duties  of  classes  and  individuals, 

*  Compare  also  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  22,  1874, 
p.  958  and  following,  and  June  i,  1874,  P-  797  and  following.  Par- 
liamentary Papers,  1874,  vol.  IV:  A  Bill  to  Relieve  Revenue  Officers 
from  remaining  Electoral  Disabilities ;  and  37  and  38  Victorise, 
c.  22 :  An  Act  to  Relieve  Revenue  Officers  from  remaining  Electoral 
Disabilities. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  185 

and  its  functions  in  that  respect  are  only  limited 
by  the  common  sense  of  Members,  who  should  exercise 
caution  in  bringing  forward  cases  of  individuals,  be- 
cause, if  political  influence  is  brought  to  bear  in  favor 
of  one  individual,  the  chances  are  that  injury  is  done 

to  some  other   individual I   think   it  is  only 

reasonable  to  expect  that,  as  both  [political]  parties  in 
the  State  have  dropped  party  politics  with  regard  to 
their  employees,  the  employees  should  in  turn  recognize 
that  fact,  and  drop  party  politics  with  regard  to  their 
employers."  Mr.  Hanbury  enforced  this  point  by 
stating  that,  upon  the  request  of  the  Civil  Servants 
themselves,  Lord  Rockingham,  Prime  Minister,  in 
1782  had  disfranchised  the  Civil  Servants  in  the 
Revenue  Departments.  At  that  time  the  party  in 
power,  through  the  Public  Service,  controlled  70  seats 
in  Parliament.  Lord  North,  who  had  been  in  power 
twelve  years,  had  sent  out  notices  to  certain  constit- 
uencies where  the  Civil  Servants  were  able  to  turn  the 
scale,  saying,  that  unless  the  Civil  Servants  supported 
the  Government,  it  would  go  hard  with  them.  There- 
upon the  Opposition  had  sent  out  counter  notices,  and 
thus  had  put  the  Civil  Service  in  an  awkward  position. 
The  result  had  been  that  the  Civil  Servants  themselves 
had  requested  Lord  Rockingham  to  disfranchise  them. 
Mr.  Hanbury  continued  with  the  statement  that,  in 
1892,  Sir  James  Fergusson  had  dismissed  Mr.  Clery 
for  ignoring  his  order  forbidding  Civil  Servants  to 
"circularize"    parliamentary    candidates.      Thereupon 


186  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Mr.  Clery,  at  Newcastle-on-Tyne,  had  said  to  a  politi- 
cal meeting  of  postmen:  "They  must  approach  the 
House  of  Commons  on  its  weak  side;  they  must  influ- 
ence Members  through  their  susceptibiHties  as  oppor- 
tunity presents  itself  when  candidates  appeal  to  their 
respective  constituencies.  A  man  is  never  more 
amenable  to  reason  than  when  making  a  request." 
Mr.  Hanbury  continued:  "What  private  employee  is 
able  to  say:  'I  am  the  permanent  servant  of  my  em- 
ployer ;  I  have  a  share  in  declaring  who  that  employer 
shall  be;  I  will  attack  him  on  his  weak  side  when  he 
comes  up  for  re-election,  and  then  I  will  use  my  power  ? 
I  will  bring  organized  pressure  to  bear  throughout  the 
constituencies,  and  I  will  make  this  bargain :  that  if  he 
will  not  vote  for  an  increase  in  my  pay,  or  diminish 
my  duties,  then  I  will  not  give  him  my  vote.'  We 
have  done  away  with  personal  and  individual  bribery, 
but  there  is  still  a  worse  form  of  bribery,  and  that  is 
when  a  man  asks  a  candidate  to  buy  his  vote  out  of  the 
public  purse.  There  are  three  great  things  which  dis- 
tinguish our  permanent  public  service.  There  is,  in 
the  first  place,  the  remarkable  loyalty  with  which  they 
serve  both  parties  in  the  State.  Then  there  is  the 
permanency  of  their  employment.  Again,  a  great 
feature  of  that  service  is  that  no  longer  is  it  a  question 
of  favoritism,  but  promotion  by  merit  is  the  rule. 
Those  three  great  features  have  been  slowly  built  upon 
this  foundation — ^the  elimination  altogether  of  the  ele- 
ment of  political  partisanship  from  the  service.     I  hope 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  187 

nothing  will  be  done  to  break  down  those  foundations, 
on  which  alone  the  public  service  can  rest — a  service 
which,  for  its  efficiency,  its  loyalty,  and  its  high  sense 
of  public  duty,  I  do  not  think  is  surpassed.  I  doubt 
whether  it  is  equalled  or  even  approached." 

Mr.  Woods'  Motion  was  lost  by  a  vote  of  163  to 
86.  It  was  supported  almost  exclusively  by  the  Op- 
position, only  three  Government  supporters  voting  for 
it} 

In  the  House  of  Commons,  on  February  20,  1899, 

Mr.  Steadman^  moved :  "And  we  humbly  represent  to 

Your  Majesty  that,  in  view  of  the  great  discontent 

existing  among  employees  of  the  Postal  and  Telegraph 

,,     c-^     ,  Services,  immediate  inquiry  should  be 

Mr.  Steadman  '  . 

demands  a  Select  m'ade  into  the  causes  of  complaint."^ 
Committee  Mr.  Steadman  had  been  elected  to  the 

House  of  Commons  by  a  majority  of  twenty  votes. 

Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury,  replied  that  no  new  facts  had  been  brought 


Ayes  Noes 

Conservatives            )  Government 2  132 

Liberal  Unionists    \  Supporters i  27 

Liberals           )  The 48  3 

Nationalists    \  Opposition 32  o 

Various  factions 3  i 

86  163 

■■'  Who's  Who,  1903,  Steadman,  W.  C,  M.  P.  (R.)  Stepney,  Tower 
Hamlets,  1898  to  1900 — returned  by  a  majority  of  twenty,  defeated 
1900;  stood  for  Parliament,  Mid-Kent,  defeated,  1892;  Hammer- 
smith, defeated,  1895.     Is  Secretary  Barge  Builders'  Trade  Union. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  February  20,  1899;  p.  1,523 
and  following. 


188  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

to  light  since  the  Tweedmouth  Committee  and  the  Nor- 
folk-Hanbury  Committee  had  made  concessions  entail- 
ing an  annual  expenditure  of  $1,900,000  a  year.  The 
Post  Office  servants  were  demanding  ''a  new  judg- 
ment on  the  old  facts."  He  continued :  ''I  confess,  I 
am  not  quite  sure  that  we  did  not  go  too  far  [in  1897], 
because  by  increasing  these  salaries  we  are  bringing 
into  this  service  an  entirely  new  social  class;  you  are 
bringing  in  men  who  perhaps  are  socially  a  little  above 
their  work,  and  these  men  naturally  have  a  standard  of 
living  and  requirements  which  are  not  essential  to  men 
doing  this  kind  of  work.  If  we  are  going  to  raise  the 
salaries  more  and  more,  you  will  get  a  higher  social 
class  into  the  service,  and  there  will  be  no  limit  to  the 
demands  made  upon  us.'*  Mr.  Hanbury  continued: 
"You  have  got  to  trust  the  heads  of  the  Departments, 
or  get  new  heads ;  it  is  quite  impossible  for  the  House 
of  Commons  to  go  into  all  these  technicalities,  and  I 
know  no  Department  where  the  work  is  more  technical 
and  more  complicated  than  the  Post  Office.  The 
Treasury  work  is  supposed  to  be  hard  to  learn  [by  the 
Members  of  the  House  of  Commons  working  for  pro- 
Parliament  not  ^^^^^^  ^o  the  Ministry],  but  the  tech- 
competent  to  nicalities  of  the  Post  Office  is  about 
judge  the  most  difficult  job  I  ever  had,  and  I 

do  not  think  a  Select  Committee  would  be  really  able 
to  get  to  the  bottom  of  this  matter.  But,  after  all,  we 
must  recollect  another  fact,  and  it  is  this:  that  the 
Civil  Service  is  a  great  deal  too  much  inclined  to  at- 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  18d 

tempt  to  put  pressure  upon  Members  of  Parliament, 
That  is  a  very  bad  system,  upon  which  we  ought  to 
put  our  foot.  It  is  bad  enough  when  it  is  brought  to 
bear  upon  the  House  as  a  whole,  but  what  would  happen 
with  a  Select  Committee  of  this  House?  You  would 
have  the  resentment  of  the  Civil  Service  focussed  and 
concentrated  upon  the  unfortunate  Members  of  the 
Committee,  and  I  do  not  think  it  would  act  more  in- 
dependently or  more  impartially  than  those  two  bodies 
which  have  sat  already." 

Mr.  Steadman's  Motion  was  lost  by  a  vote  of  159 
to  91.  Eighty-six  members  of  the  Opposition  and  two 
Government  supporters  voted  for  the  Motion.^ 

On  June  i,  1899,  Mr.  Steadman  moved  the  reduction 
of  the  Postmaster  General's  salary  by  $500,  by  way  of 
asking  the  House  of  Commons  to  instruct  the  Govern- 
ment to  appoint  a  Select  Committee  of  the  House  of 
Commons  to  investigate  the  grievances  of  the  Post 
Office  employees.^  He  said :  "It  stands  to  reason  that 
a  Departmental  Committee  [Tweedmouth  Committee] 
composed  of  officials,  which  contained  only  one  im- 
partial member — a  Member  of  the  House  of  Lords — 

Ayes  Noes 

Conservatives          )    Government i  129 

Liberal  Unionists  )     Supporters i  28 

Liberals  )   The 67  2 

Nationalists   )   Opposition 19  o 

Various  factions 3  o 

91  159 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  i,  1899,  p.  99  and  fol- 
lowing. 


190  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

could  not  be  satisfactory  to  the  160,000  male  and  fe- 
male employees  in  the  Post  Office  service Every 

department  of  the  Post  Office  service  now  has  its 
r-  ■,  ^  organization.     All  these  organizations 

have  "Friends"  in  right  through  the  departments  have 
the  Commons  ^j^^ji-  coaches  and  organizers ;  true, 
they  are  not  yet  directly  represented  here  in  this  House, 
but  they  have  friends  here  who  are  prepared  to  take  up 
their  quarrels." 

Captain  Norton^  seconded  the  Motion.  He  spoke 
of  the  fact  that  any  telegraphist  could  obtain  $30  a 
year  extra  pay  by  making  himself  competent  to  dis- 
charge the  duties  of  a  letter  sorter,  and  another  $30  by 
passing  an  examination  on  the  technical  questions  of 
telegraphy.  He  asserted  that  it  was  a  grievance  that 
the  men  had  to  acquire,  in  their  leisure  hours,  the  addi- 
tional proficiency  in  question;  and  that  only  46  per 
cent,  of  the  men  were  able  to  pass  the  examinations  on 
the  technical  questions  involved  in  telegraphy. 

Mr.  Maddison^  supported  Mr.  Steadman's  Motion 


^  Who's  Who,  1903,  Norton,  C.  W.,  M.  P.  (L.)  W.  Newington, 
London,  since  1892.  Late  Captain  5th  Royal  Irish  Lancers,  .... 
some  years  in  India;  selected  to  report  upon  Italian  Cavalry,  1880; 
Brigade-Major  of  Cavalry,  Aldershot,  1881-82.  In  1906  Captain 
Norton  was  made  a  Junior  Lord  of  the  Treasury  in  the  Campbell- 
Bannerman  Liberal  Government. 

''Who's  Who,  1903,  Maddison,  F.,  M.  P.,  Sheffield,  Brightside 
Division,  1897  to  1900.  Three  years  Chairman  of  the  Hull  Branch 
of  Typographical  Association ;  first  Labor  Member  of  the  Hull  Cor- 
poration;  offered  post  of  Labor  Correspondent  to  the  Board  of 
Trade  in  1893  J  Editor  of  the  Railway  Review,  official  organ  of  the 
Amalgamated  Society  of  Railway  Servants  (resigned,  1897)  ;  Ex- 
President  of  the  Labor  Association  for  Promoting  Co-operative 
Productioa. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  191 

with  the  words :  "For  my  part,  I  have  always  had  some 
hesitation  in  taking  up  the  cases  of  men  employed  by 
the  State,  because  undoubtedly  there  is  a  sort  of  notion 
that,  because  they  are  employed  by  the  State,  they  can 
make  such  demands  as  they  like,  because  they  are  paid 
out  of  a  very  full  Treasury.  I  know  that  every  half 
penny  of  that  money  comes  out  of  the  general  taxation 
of  the  country,  and  I  agree  that  we  are  here  as  the 
guardians  of  the  public  purse.  The  Right  Honorable 
Gentleman  has  never  denied  that  we  are  here  as  the 
guardians  of  these  men's  interest,  and  it  has  not  been 
shown  that  the  public  interest  is  of  greater  importance 
than  the  interest  of  these  men,  who  do  so  much  for  the 

prosperity  of  the  Country In  this  case  we  want 

a  non-official  committee,  although  I  confess  that  I  do 
not  think  such  an  inquiry  will  put  an  end  to  disputes 
in  the  future." 

Mr.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury, 
said  that  if  the  Government  yielded  to  the  demand  for 
a  House  of  Commons  Committee  in  this  case,  there 
would  be  a  House  of  Commons  Committee  sitting  prac- 
tically every  session  of  Parliament.  The  points  now 
under  discussion  had  been  under  agitation  for  four, 
five,  or  six  years.  Before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee 
entered  upon  its  duties,  and  before  the  Norfolk-Han- 
bury  Conference  with  Members  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, the  Government  had  a  distinct  understanding 
with  Members  of  the  House  that  the  decisions  come  to 
should  be  accepted.     Mr.  Hanbury  continued:  "It  is 


192  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

somewhat  difficult,  no  doubt,  to  draw  a  comparison  be- 
tween what  the  Post  Office  pays  and  what  is  paid  by 
private  firms.  But  I  will  give  one  comparison,  at  any 
rate,  and  I  think  it  is  the  only  one  possible.  A  few 
years  ago  we  took  over  from  the  National  Telephone 
Company  the  employees,  principally  women,  who  were 
engaged  on  the  [long-distance]  trunk  wires,  and  I 
venture  to  say  that,  counting  in  the  pensions  we  pay, 
these  people  are  receiving  from  30  per  cent,  to  40  per 
cent,  larger  salaries  than  when  they  were  in  the  employ- 
ment of  the  company.  Honorable  Members  who  draw 
comparisons  between  servants  of  the  State  and  others, 
are  too  apt  to  forget  the  great  facilities  Post  Office 
servants  get,  such  as  constant  employment,  large  pen- 
sions, good  holidays,  for  which  they  are  paid,  and  large 
sick-pay  and  sick-leave.  If  these  are  added  together, 
it  will  be  found  that  the  Post  Office  is  paying  wages 
considerably  above  the  level  of  those  paid  by  outside 
employers.  I  should  like  to  say  one  further  word  with 
regard  to  this  application  for  a  Committee  of  this 
House.  Why  should  we  have  it  at  all  ?  Let  me  speak 
with  perfect  frankness  about  this  thing.  We  have  al- 
ready had  two  Committees ;  we  have  also  had  a  great 
deal  of  pressure  brought  to  bear  upon  Members;  that 
pressure  is  becoming  almost  intolerable.  The  honor- 
able Member  for  Newington  posed  as  the  just  judge 
and  said :  'I  am  weary  of  all  this  agitation ;  let  us  try 
to  put  an  end  to  it.'  Well  I  am  not  weary  of  the 
agitation ;  so  long  as  I  am  satisfied,  as  I  am  now,  that 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  193 

everything  has  been  done  that  ought  to  be  done  for  the 
men,  I  will  not  yield  to  agitation.  I  say  at  once  that 
I  do  myself  believe  that,  considering  everything,  and 
that  full  inquiry  has  already  been  held,  the  only  ad- 
vantage these  men  could  derive  from  a  House  of  Com- 
mons Committee  would  be  that  the  agitation  and 
pressure,  now  distributed  over  the  whole  House,  would 
be  focussed  and  concentrated  upon  the  Select  Com- 
mittee. I,  for  one,  am  not  prepared  to  grant  a  Com- 
mittee of  that  kind." 

Mr.  Steadman's  Motion  was  lost  by  a  vote  of  157 
to  107;  ninety-seven  members  of  the  Opposition  and 
nine  Government  supporters  voting  for  the  Motion.^ 

On  April  2"],  1900,  Mr.  Steadman  moved  the  reduc- 
tion of  the  Postmaster  General's  salary  by  $2,500.^ 
He  said:  "I  rise  for  the  purpose  of  advocating  the 
claims  of  the  160,000  persons  employed  in  the  Post 

,,    ^      ,      ,      Office  for  a  fair  and  impartial  Com- 

My.  Steadman  s  . 

third  demand       mittee  of  Inquiry  to  be  elected  by  this 

for  a  Select         House  to  look  into  their  grievances." 

The     contention     that    there     were 

grievances,  Mr.  Steadman  supported  with  the  follow- 

*  Ayes  Noes 

Conservatives          "»  Government 5  133 

Liberal  Unionists   /Supporters 4  21 

Liberals         )    The 83  2 

Nationalists  y    Opposition 14  o 

Various  factions i  i 

107  157 

'Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  27,  1900,  p.  199  and 
following.  X^^RA^y^ 

I"?  /^ 

I   UNIVERSIT 


194  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

ing  arguments.  From  1881  to  1891,  the  Civil  Service 
Commissioners,  in  issuing  notices  that  they  would  hold 
competitive  examinations  for  intending  entrants  into 
the  telegraph  service,  had  stated  that  in  London  teleg- 
raphists had  "a  prospect  of  obtaining  [ultimately] 
$950  a  year."  That,  argued  Mr.  Steadman,  was  a 
contract  between  the  Government  and  the  telegraphists 
who  entered  the  London  service  between  1881  and 
1 89 1,  that  every  such  telegraphist  should  rise  to  $950. 
The  Government  therefore  had  committed  a  breach  of 
contract  when,  in  1892,  it  had  announced  that  good 
character  and  good  skill  as  an  operator  would  not 
secure  a  telegraphist  promotion  to  the  senior  class,  in 
which  the  salary  rose  from  $800  a  year  to  $950.  To 
be  eligible  for  promotion  to  the  senior  class,  a  man 
must  be  not  only  an  excellent  telegraphist,  but  must, 
in  addition,  possess  such  executive  ability  as  would 
enable  him  to  act  as  an  overseer,  or  as  assistant  to  the 
Assistant  Superintendent. 

Mr.  Steadman  continued :  "Now  I  come  to  the  ques- 
tion of  the  postmen.  Goodness  knows  where  all  that 
$1,950,000  a  year  has  gone  to.  You  cannot  get  away 
from  the  fact  that  the  postman  to-day  in  London  com- 
mences [at  the  age  of  16  years  to  18  years]   with  a 

minimum  wage  of  $4.50  a  week Fancy  that, 

Mr.  Chairman,  a  man  commencing  on  $4.50  a  week, 
and  employed  by  the  State  in  a  Department  that  has  a 
clean  profit  of  between  $15,000,000  and  $20,000,000." 
Mr.   Steadman  next  contended  that  a  good  conduct 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  195 

stripe — ^worth  $13  a  year — should  be  given  every  three 
years;  that  the  present  period  of  five  years  was  too 
long.  Moreover,  the  Department  was  altogether  too 
rigorous  in  withholding  good  conduct-  stripes  for 
breaches  of  discipline.  Mr.  Steadman  cited  the  fol- 
lowing instances  to  prove  the  necessity  of  an  inquiry 
by  Members  of  the  House  of  Commons  into  the  dis- 
cipline enforced  by  the  Department.  A  man  who  had 
served  nine  years  as  an  auxiliary  postman  had  been 
arrested  on  the  charge  of  stealing  a  postal  money  order. 
Though  found  not  guilty  by  the  Court,  he  had  been 
dismissed,  without  a  certificate  of  good  character. 
Postman  Taylor,  of  Stirling,  after  suffering  an  acci- 
dent, was  unable  to  cover  his  route  in  the  time  fixed  by 
the  Post  Office.  Thereupon  the  local  postmaster  had 
asked  Taylor  to  retire  on  a  pension.  "The  latest  in- 
formation that  I  have  in  regard  to  that  case  is  that  the 
man  who  is  now  doing  Taylor's  duties,  in  order  to  get 
through  his  round  in  the  time  allotted,  has  his  son  to 
help  him."  Again,  the  annual  increment  had  been 
withheld  from  one  Lacon,  a  telegraphist  at  Birming- 
ham, and  the  local  Secretary  of  the  Postal  Telegraph 
Clerks'  Association.  The  Secretary  to  the  Treasury, 
Mr.  Hanbury,  had  told  Mr.  Steadman  that  the  Super- 
intendent at  Birmingham  reported  that  Lacon's  incre- 
ment had  been  withheld  because  Lacon  had  been  insub- 
ordinate while  on  duty.  Lacon  had  told  Mr.  Stead- 
man that  he  had  been  disciplined  because  of  his  con- 
nection with  the  union.     Mr.  Steadman  added :  "I  will 


196  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

not  for  one  moment  attempt  to  stand  up  in  the  House 
and  attack  permanent  officials  who  are  not  able  to  de- 
fend themselves ;  it  would  be  unmanly  for  me  to  do  so. 
But  I  do  say  that  I  have  as  much  right  to  believe  the 
statement  of  Lacon,  as  the  Right  Honorable  Gentle- 
man [the  Secretary  to  the  Treasury]  has  to  believe  the 
statement  of  the  Birmingham  Superintendent.  There 
is  only  one  way  of  proving  these  cases,  and  that  is  for 
a  Committee  of  impartial  Members  of  this  House  to  be 
appointed  before  which  the  permanent  official  can  state 
his  case  and  the  men  theirs.  If  that  is  done,  the  Mem- 
bers, if  their  minds  are  unbiassed,  will  very  soon  be 
able  to  judge  as  to  who  is  telling  the  truth." 

Sir  Albert  RoUit  seconded  Mr.  Steadman's  Motion, 
saying:  "and  we  ought  not  to  overlook  the  fact,  that, 
rightly  or  wrongly,  these  men  now  have  votes,  and  if 
Commons  re-  ^hey  cannot  obtain  redress  for  their 
minded  of  Civil  grievances  here  in  the  House  of  Com- 
Servants'  votes  j^ons,  they  will  try  to  obtain  it  from 
our  masters,  the  electorate." 

Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury,  and  representative  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons of  the  Postmaster  General,  the  Duke  of  Nor- 
folk, "on  principle"  opposed  the  request  for  a  Select 
Committee.  "Well,  I  say  that  the  House  of  Com- 
mons is  the  last  body  which  ought  to  interfere  in  these 
questions  of  the  payment  of  our  public  servants.  It 
is  the  last  body  which  ought  to  be  appealed  to  as 
regularly  as  it  is  by  civil  servants  to  raise  their  sala- 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  197 

ries,  because  that,  after  all,  is  the  real  object  of  this 
proposed  committee.  Already  I  think  the  pressure 
brought  to  bear  on  individual  Members,  and  especially 
on  Members  who  have  a  large  number  of  civil  servants 
in  their  constituencies,  has  become  perfectly  intolerable, 
and  civil  servants  may  depend  upon  it  that  it  is  the 
general  opinion  in  this  House,  although  they  may  have 
their  cause  advocated  by  Members  upon  whom  they 
may  be  able  to  bring  particular  pressure,  because  large 
numbers  of  them  happen  to  live  in  the  constituencies 
of  those  Members;  I  repeat  that  they  may  depend 
upon  it  that  in  the  opinion  of  the  great  body  of  the 
Members  of  this  House  they  are  taking  a  highly  irreg- 
ular course,  and  are  in  no  way  making  their  position 
more  favorable  in  the  minds  of  the  great  majority  of 
Members.  Nothing  will  induce  me  personally  to  agree 
to  any  committee  such  as  h^s  been  suggested.  And 
while  I  object  on  principle,  I  object  also  because  abso- 
lutely no  necessity  has  been  shown  for  the  committee. 
....  The  Duke  of  Norfolk  and  I,  because  we  were 
so  desirous  that  no  case  of  the  slightest  grievance 
should  be  left  untouched,  inquired  into  every  grievance 
which  was  said  to  have  been  left  unredressed  by  the 

Tweedmouth    Committee Every    Member    of 

the  House  had  a  right  to  attend  our  [Norfolk-Hanbury 
Committee]  meetings,  and  to  cross-examine  the  wit- 
nesses  It  is  the  intention  of  the  Post  Office  and 

of  the  Treasury  to  carry  out  the  recommendations  of 
the  Tweedmouth  Committee  to  the  very  fullest  extent, 


198  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

and  if  the  honorable  Member  [Mr.  Steadman]  is  aSle 
to  show  me  any  case  whatever  in  which  that  has  not 
been  done,  even  in  the  case  of  an  individual  postman, 
or  sorter,  or  telegraphist,  I  will  go  into  it  myself,  and 
I  will  do  more :  I  will  promise  that  the  grievance  shall 
be  redressed." 

Mr.  Steadman's  Motion  was  lost  by  a  vote  of  66  to 
46.  It  was  supported  by  forty-one  members  of  the 
Opposition  and  by  four  supporters  of  the  Govern- 
ment.^ 

On  June  7,  1901,  while  the  House  of  Commons  was 
in  Committee  of  Supply,  Mr.  Thomas  Bayley^  asked 
for  a  Select  Committee  of  the  House  of  Commons  to 
investigate  the  grievance  of  the  Post  Office  servants.^ 
He  said :  "This  House  shows  a  want  of  moral  courage 
by  throwing  the  responsibility  for  redressing  the  griev- 
ance of  the  Post  Office  servants  on  the  other  House 
[Lord  Tweedmouth]  or  the  permanent  officials  of  any 
Department  whatsoever."     Mr.  Bayley  had  begun  his 

*  Ayes  Noes 

Conservatives           )  Government 4  55 

Liberal  Unionists   )  Supporters o  9 

Liberals         )    The 40  o 

Nationalists  )   Opposition i  o 

Various  factions i  2 

46  66 

^  Who's  Who,  1903,  Bayley,  Thos.,  J.  P.,  M.  P.  (L)  Chesterfield 
Division,  Derbyshire,  since  1892.  Many  years  on  Nottingham  Town 
Council ;  Alderman,  Nottingham  County  Council ;  contested  Bark- 
ston  Ash  Division  of  Yorkshire,  1885  ;  Chesterfield,  1886. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  7,  1901,  p.  1,358  and 
following. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  199 

political  career  as  a  Town  Councillor  in  Nottingham. 
After  many  Mejnbers  had  supported  the  request  for 
a  Select  Committee,  the  Prime  Minister,  Mr.  A.  J. 
Balfour,  said :  "I  have  listened  with  great  interest  to 
this  debate,  and,  I  confess  frankly,  with  considerable 
The  Prime  anxiety  as  to  the  future  of  the  public 

Minister's  Anxiety  sevYice  if  pressure  of  the  kind  which 
has  been  put  upon  the  Government  to-night  is  persisted 
in  by  this  House.  This  House  is  omnipotent.  It  can 
make  and  unmake  Governments.  It  can  decide  what, 
when,  and  how  public  money  is  to  be  spent.  But  with 
that  omnipotence  I  would  venture  to  urge  upon  Mem- 
bers their  great  responsibility  with  a  subject  like  this. 
Everyone  knows  that  a  great  organized  body  like  the 
Post  Office  Service  has  in  its  power  to  put  great  pres- 
sure upon  Members,  but  I  earnestly  urge  upon  honor- 
able Gentlemen  that  unless  we  take  our  courage  in  both 
hands,  and  say  that,  although  most  desirous  that  all 
legitimate  grievances  shall  be  dealt  with,  we  cannot 
permit  the  Government  as  a  great  employer  of  labor  to 
have  this  kind  of  pressure  put  upon  it,  I  think  the 
future  of  the  public  service  is  in  peril.  I  assure  the 
committee  that  I  speak  with  a  great  sense  of  respon- 
sibility. In  this  very  case  the  Post  Office  employees 
have  brought  forward  their  grievances  year  after  year. 
Two  Commissions  have  been  appointed,  and  no  one 
ever  ventured  to  impugn  the  ability  or  impartiality  of 
the  members  of  those  Commissions.  These  Com- 
missions made  the  fullest  examination  into  the  case  put 


200  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

before  them,  and  reported  at  length,  and  as  a  conse- 
quence of  that  report  the  British  taxpayers  are  now 
paying  $2,500,000  more  of  money  than  they  paid  be- 
fore  In  none  of  the  speeches  has  any  specific 

complaint  been  brought  forward,  or  any  point  urged 
which  suggests  the  necessity  for  further  inquiry,  but 
only  the  statement  that  there  is  a  feeling  of  uneasiness, 
and  a  desire  for  further  examination,  and  that  when 
such  a  desire  is  expressed,  the  House  should  listen  to 
it.  We  cannot  keep  the  Civil  Service  in  a  sound  and 
healthy  condition  if  we  are  going  to  examine  into  it  by 
a  committee  every  five  years.  If  the  House  of 
Commons  were  to  yield  to  the  very  natural  temptation 
of  granting  a  committee  such  as  had  been  asked  for, 
though  we  might  escape  an  inconvenient  division,  we 
should  be  unworthy,  in  my  opinion,  of  bearing  any 
longer  the  great  responsibility  of  being  the  enormous 
employer  of  labor  that  we  are.  We  should  not  be  car- 
rying out  our  duty  to  the  public,  and,  worst  of  all,  we 
should  aim  a  blow  at  the  Civil  Service,  which  is  the 
boast  of  this  country  and  the  envy  of  the  civilized 
world,  because  we  should  become  the  parliamentary 
creatures  of  every  organized  body  of  public  servants 
who  chose  to  use  the  great  power  which  the  Constitu- 
tion gives,  for  ends  which  I  am  sure  they  believe  to  be 
right,  but  which  this  House  could  not  yield  to  in  the 
manner  now  suggested  without  derogating  from  the 
high  functions  and  spirit  of  pure  impartiality  which 
the  House  must  maintain  if  Members  are  to  do  their 
duty  by  their  constituents." 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  201 

Mr.  Bayley's  Motion  was  lost  by  a  vote  of  148  to 
103 ;  it  being  supported  by  ninety-one  members  of  the 
Opposition  and  nine  Government  supporters.^ 

On  April  18,  1902,  while  the  House  of  Commons 
was  in  Committee  of  Supply,  Captain  Norton^  moved 
the  reduction  by  $500  of  the  item :  Salaries  and  Work- 
ing Expenses  of  the  Post  Office  Telegraph  Service: 
$12,056,250.^  He  said:  'The  case  briefly  was  this, 
that   the   Government  had  been  guilty  of  a  distinct 

n  ^.  •    AT    ^        breach  of  faith  in  connection  with  a 

Captatn  Norton 

demands  a  Select  certain  number  of  worthy  Government 
Committee  officials.     He  knew  that  to  make  this 

statement  of  breach  of  faith  was  what  must  be  called  a 
strong  order,  but  he  was  prepared  to  prove  that  he  was 
not  exaggerating  in  the  smallest  degree."  He  went 
on  to  state  that  the  telegraphists  who  entered  the  serv- 
ice in  London  in  1881  to  1891,  when  the  Civil  Service 
Commissioners  had  advertised  that  entrants  had  "a 

*  Ayes  Noes 

Conservatives           )  Government 8  120 

Liberal  Unionists    )  Supporters i  25 

Liberals           )  The 57  o 

Nationalists    )  Opposition 34  o 

Various  factions 3  3 

103  148 

^  Who's  Who,  1905,  Norton,  C.  W.,  M.  P.  (L.)  West  Newington 
(London),  since  1892;  late  Captain  5th  Royal  Irish  Lancers;  selected 
to  report  upon  Italian  Cavalry,  1880 ;  Brigade-Major  of  Cavalry, 
Aldershot,  1881-82.  In  1906  Captain  Norton  was  made  a  Junior 
Lord  of  the  Treasury  in  the  Campbell-Bannerman  Liberal  Gov- 
ernment. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  18,  1902,  p.  660  and 
following. 


202  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

prospect  of  obtaining  $950,"  had  a  contract  with  the 
Government  that  the  possession  of  "ordinary  manipu- 
lative ability,  v^ith  regular  attendance  and  good  con- 
duct" would  insure  advancement  to  a  position  paying 
$950.  The  Government  had  broken  that  contract  by 
prescribing,  in  1892,  that  men  "must  be  equal  to  super- 
vising duties"  in  order  to  be  promoted  to  the  positions 
carrying  $950. 

Sir  Albert  Rollit^  supported  Captain  Norton  with 
the  words :  "For  a  long  time  past  there  had  been  a  very 
strong  and  general  feeling  in  the  service  that  many  of 
the  men  had  been  the  victims  of  something  amounting 
almost  to  an  imposition,  however  unintentional,  on  the 
part  of  a  public  Department.  Strong  terms  had  been 
used  in  the  course  of  the  debate,  but  he  should  endeavor 
to  deal  with  the  matter  on  the  basis  of  what  he 
believed  to  have  been  a  contract  between  those  employ- 
ees and  the  Post  Office.  It  was  not  difficult  to  show 
that  that  implied — or,  he  might  even  say,  express — con- 
tract had  induced  many  to  enter  the  service,  only  to 
find  that  the  contract  was  afterward  departed  from  by 
one  of  the  contracting  parties,  the  State." 

Mr.  Keir  Hardie  supported  Captain  Norton's  Motion 
with  the  argument  that  the  concessions  made  by  the 

»  Who's  Who,  1904.  Rollit,  Sir  Albert  Kaye,  J.  P.,  LL.  D.,  D.  C.  L., 
D.  L.,  M.  P.,  Islington,  since  1886.  Partner  in  Bailey  and 
Leetham,  steamship  owners ;  Director  of  National  Telephone  Co. ; 
Mayor  of  Hull  1883  to  1885;  President  of  Associated  Chambers  of 
Commerce  of  the  United  Kingdom,  1890  to  1896;  President  London 
Chambers  of  Commerce  1893  to  1898;  Chairman  Inspection  Com- 
mittee, Trustee  Savings  Bank  since  1890 ;  President  Municipal  Cor- 
porations' Association. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  203 

Tweedmonth  Committee  had  imposed  no  additional 
burdens  upon  the  taxpayers,  for  that  committee  merely 
had  allocated  a  small  portion  of  the  extra  profit  made 
by  the  Post  Office  to  the  Post  Office  servants  who  made 
that  profit.  Mr.  Keir  Hardie  at  one  time  has  held  the 
office  of  Chairman  of  the  Independent  Labor  Party/ 
an  organization  that  brings  to  bear  upon  the  British 
municipal  governmients  a  pressure  similar  to  that  here 
shown  to  be  brought  upon  the  House  of  Commons. 

Mr.  Gibson  Bowles  said :  "He  was  aware  that  many 
honorable  Members  who  brought  forward  the  position 
of  servants  of  the  State,  did  so  against  their  own  de- 
sires, because  of  the  almost  irresistible  pressure  placed 
upon  them  by  the  servants  of  the  State,  who  were  at 

Members  of  ^^^  ^ame  time  electors He  sup- 

Parliament  ported  the  Secretary  to  the  Treasury 

coerced  jj^  resisting  this  particular  amendment, 

because  it  was  one  of  many  which  tended  to  illustrate 
a  form  of  tyranny  that  was  becoming  unbearable,  and 
which  tended  seriously  to  injure  the  character  of  this 
House  as  making  its  Members  the  advocates  of  classes, 
sections,  and  little  communities,  instead  of  being  trus- 
tees not  for  them  alone,  but  for  the  whole  community." 

Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Financial  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury,  and  representative  in  the  House  of  Commons 
of  the  Postmaster  General,  the  Marquis  of  London- 
derry, said  he  "supposed  it  would  not  be  unfair  to  say 
that  an  officer  joining  the  British  Army  had  a  prospect 

'  Who's  Who,  1905. 


204  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

of  becoming  a  field  marshal."  As  to  the  telegraphists, 
"all  that  the  Government  ever  had  held  out  to  them 
was  a  prospect  of  a  certain  number  of  them  attaining 
something  beyond  the  ordinary  maximum"  of  $800, 
to  which  any  man  could  rise  by  the  display  of  ordinary 
manipulative  ability  and  the  observance  of  good  con- 
duct. Under  Mr.  Fawcett,  in  1881  to  1884,  one  teleg- 
raphist out  of  every  6.3  telegraphists  had  risen  be- 
yond $800.  In  1890  the  proportion  in  question  had 
been  exactly  the  same.  In  1902,  the  proportion  was 
one  in  six,  or,  "practically  the  same." 

Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain  continued :  "When  I  con- 
sider the  great  concessions  that  were  made  [by  the 
Tweedmouth  Committee],  and  the  great  burden  that 
was  placed  upon  the  taxpayers,  the  care  that  was  given 
to  that  inquiry,  and  the  opportunity  that  was  afforded 
to  every  one  to  have  their  grievances  heard,  I  cannot 
pretend  to  think  that  a  case  has  been  made  out  for  try- 
ing, not  fresh  matters,  but  for  retrying  the  same  mat- 
ters and  changing  the  tribunal,  merely  because  all  its 
decisions  [i.  c,  some  of  its  decisions]  were  not  agree- 
able to  one  of  the  parties  concerned.  I  hope  the  House 
will  not  do  anything  so  fatal  to  the  efficiency  and  the 
organization  of  our  Civil  Service,  as  to  allow  any  large 
body  of  civil  servants  to  think  that  they  have  only  to  be 
importunate  enough  to  secure  in  this  House  repeated 
inquiries  into  their  grievances,  no  matter  what  previous 
care  has  been  given  to  their  consideration.  I  trust 
this  House  will  have  confidence  in  the  desire  of  the 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  205 

Postmaster  General  to  deal  fairly  with  all  his  employ- 
ees, and  believe  me  when  I  say  that  there  is  nothing 
easier  for  us  to  do  than  to  give  way ;  and  that  it  is  only 
because  we  believe  it  to  be  our  duty  to  the  taxpayers 
that  we  find  it  necessary  to  refuse  these  recurring  and 
increasing  demands." 

Captain  Norton's  Motion  was  lost  by  a  vote  of  164 
to  134.  It  was  supported  by  one  hundred  and  twenty- 
three  Opposition  members,  and  by  seven  Government 
supporters.^ 

A  few  hours  later,  Mr.  Thomas  Bayley^  moved  a 
reduction  of  $500  on  the  salary  of  the  Postmaster 
General,  in  order  to  call  attention  to  the  grievances  of 
the  officials  of  the  Post  Office.^  He  said  there  should 
be  a  Court  of  Appeal  for  the  civil  servants,  and  that 
Court  should  be  the  House  of  Commons  alone;  when- 
ever a  dispute  arose  between  the  Government  of  the 
day  and  its  servants,  the  House  should  constitute  itself 
the  Court  of  Appeal.  Mr.  Bayley  added :  "It  had  been 
distinctly  laid  down  that  it  was  no  part  of  the  duty  of 
the  Post  Office  to  make  a  profit,  but  it  should  be  worked 

*  Ayes  Noes 

Conservatives           )  Government 6  127 

Liberal  Unionists    )  Supporters i  31 

Liberals          )    The 72  4 

Nationalists^    Opposition 51  o 

Various  factions 4  2 

134  164 

""  Who's  Who,  1905,  Bayley,  Thos.,  J.  P.,  M.  P.  (L.),  Chesterfield 

Division  Derbyshire   since  1892;  many  years  on  Nottingham  Town 

Council. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April   18,   1902,  p.  706  and 

following. 


206  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

for  the  future  convenience  of  the  pubHc  and  not  re- 
duced to  the  level  of  a  mere  profit  making  machine. 
It  was  this  desire  on  the  part  of  the  Post  Office  officials 
to  make  profit  which  lay  at  the  root  of  all  the  troubles 
which  the  House  had  been  discussing  in  the  debate  that 
evening." 

Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Financial  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury,  and  representative,  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, of  the  Postmaster  General,  replied :  "I  refuse  to 
resign  one  particle  of  my  responsibility,  or  to  accept 
the  suggestion  that  the  Government  should  wash 
their  hands  of  their  responsibility,  and  throw  the  sub- 
ject, as  an  open  question,  before  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, and  ask  a  Committee  of  this  House,  without  aid 
or  guidance  from  responsible  Ministers,  to  judge  upon 
the  multitude  of  conflicting  interests  and  details  inci- 
dent to  the  administration  of  so  great  a  service  as  the 
Post  Office.  I,  for  one,  will  not  be  party  to  putting 
off  that  responsibility  on  to  the  House  of  Commons. 
....  But  we  consider  that  it  would  be  a  grave  dere- 
liction of  duty  on  our  part  to  throw  this  great  service 
into  the  turmoil  and  confusion  of  a  Parliamentary  in- 
quiry, with  the  knowledge  that  such  an  inquiry  would 
not  be  final — honorable  Gentlemen  who  have  supported 
this  Amendment  have  declared  that  to  talk  about  final- 
ity in  this  matter  is  absurd — with  the  knowledge  that 
what  is  done  to-day  for  the  Post  Office,  must  be  done 
to-morrow  for  every  other  Department  employing  a 
large  number  of  Government  servants,  until  elections 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  207 

to  this  House  will  depend  more  and  more  on  the  wil- 
lingness of  Members  to  purchase  the  support  of  those 
who  are  in  public  employment  by  promises  of  conces- 
sions at  the  public  expense,  instead  of  securing  their 
support,  like  that  of  other  citizens,  on  public  grounds 
and  national  interests." 

On  April  30,  1903,  while  the  House  was  in  Com- 
mittee of  Supply,  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Post- 
master General,  prefaced  the  discussion  by  the  Com- 
mittee of  the  Post  Office  Vote,  with  the  following 
statement '}....  "The  demand  is  that  a  Select  Com- 
mittee of  this  House  should  be  appointed  to  examine 
The  Govern-  ^"^^  ^^^  grievances  of  the  Post  Office 
menfs  Com-  Staff.  I  have  made  it  my  business 
promise  ^-^^^^  j  j^^^^  ^^^^  ^^  ^^^  p^g^  Office  to 

see  that  every  memorial  from  the  staff  dealing  with 
their  grievances,  addressed  to  me,  should  come  before 

me  personally Even   though   I   have  felt  that 

many  of  the  matters  thus  brought  to  my  notice  were 
very  small  details  of  administration.  I  am  determined 
that  an  official  [employee]  of  the  Post  Office,  going 
to  the  head  of  his  service,  should  receive  as  fair  and 
careful  consideration  of  his  appeal,  if  he  applies  to  me 
direct,  as  if  he  sought  Parliamentary  influence  to  urge 
his  claim.  And  I  venture  to  think  that  nothing  has 
occurred  during  the  time  that  I  have  been  responsible 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  30,  1903,  p.  1,015  and 
following,  and  May   11,  p.   313  and  following. 


208  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

which  ran  justify  any  servant  of  the  Post  Office  in 
saying  that  he  is  unable,  except  by  Parliamentary  influ- 
ence, or  by  Parliamentary  exposure,  to  obtain  the  at- 
tention of  the  head  of  the  Department.  The  other 
day  at  the  request  of  several  Members  on  both  sides 
of  the  House,  I  met  the  Members  themselves,  and  con- 
sented that  if  they  wished,  they  should  be  accompanied 
by  members  of  the  Post  Office  Staff,  who  should  make 
before  them,  and  in  my  presence,  a  statement  of  the 
grounds  on  which  they  asked  for  this  inquiry  by  a 
Select  Committee,  in  order  that  then  and  there  I  might 
discuss  it  with  my  honorable  friends.  The  Vote 
comes  on  to-night,  and  I  intend  to  take  this  opportu- 
nity of  making  a  few  observations  on  the  grounds  for 
this  Parliamentary  inquiry  as  put  forth  by  the  Staff. 
There  are  three  main  grounds  alleged  by  the  spokes- 
man for  the  staff  for  a  Parliamentary  inquiry — wages, 
sanitation  [i.  e.,  the  sanitary  condition  of  certain 
offices],  and  meal  reliefs,  or  the  time  allowed  out  of 
working  hours  for  taking  refreshment.  If  a  person 
does  eight  hours'  continuous  work  he  is  allowed  half 
an  hour  out  of  that  time  for  a  meal,  reducing  his  actual 

working  hours  to  seven  and  a  half  hours I  only 

wish  to  draw  the  attention  of  the  committee  to  what 
was  described  to  me  as  a  typical  grievance  by  the 
spokesman  of  a  deputation  which  waited  on  me  shortly 
before  Christmas.  Certain  men  are  on  duty  from  lo 
a.  m.  to  2  p.  m.,  and  from  4  p.  m.  to  8  p.  m.,  and  com- 
plain because  they  are  not  allowed  20  minutes  for  tea. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  209 

In  the  judgment  of  any  impartial  person,  was  that  a 
reasonable  grievance?  ....  I  myself  have  come  to 
the  conclusion,  ....  that  while  a  great  num'ber  of 
the  complaints  made  have  no  foundation  in  justice, 
and  that  a  great  number  of  the  men  who  think  them- 
selves aggrieved  would  find  it  difficult  to  get,  else- 
where than  in  the  public  service,  such  good  employ- 
ment as  they  have  now,  there  are  other  cases  which  are 
open  to  improvement  and  for  which  further  inquiry 
is  needed  to  fix  exactly  what  should  be  done.  The 
Government  is  unalterably  opposed  to  a  Select  Com- 
mittee of  the  House  of  Commons  for  the  decision  of 
this  question.  Honorable  Members  know,  and  it  is 
no  use  blinking  it,  the  kind  of  pressure  which  is 
brought  to  bear,  or  is  attempted  to  be  brought  to  bear, 
upon  Members  in  all  parts  of  the  House  by  the  public 
servants,  servants  of  the  Post  Office,  I  am  afraid, 
especially,  though  not  entirely  [exclusively],  at  election 
times.  I  have  had  Members  come  to  me,  not  from 
one  side  of  the  House  alone,  to  seek  from  me,  in  my 
position  as  Postmaster  General,  protection  for  them 
in  the  discharge  of  their  public  duties  against  the  pres- 
sure sought  to  be  put  upon  them  by  the  employees  of 
the  Post  Office.  Even  if  the  machinery  by  which  our 
Select  Committees  are  appointed  were  such  as  would 
enable  us  to  secure  a  Select  Committee  composed  of 
thoroughly  impartial  men  who  had  committed  them- 
selves by  no  expression  of  opinion,  I  still  think  that  it 
would  not  be  fair  to  pick  out  fifteen  Members  of  this 
14 


210  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

House  and  make  them  marked  men  for  the  purposes 
of  such  pressure  as  is  now  distributed  more  or  less  over 
the  whole  Assembly.  But  if  I  am  opposed  to  the 
appointment  of  a  House  of  Commons  Committee  for 
fixing  wages  in  the  Post  Office,  I  am  still  more  opposed 
to  thrusting  upon  it,  or,  indeed,  on  any  Committee,  the 
duty  of  regulating  in  all  its  details  the  daily  adminis- 
tration and  work  of  the  Post  Office.  The  wages  paid 
are  not  in  all  respects  satisfactory,  some  are  too  low, 
others  are  too  high.  Advice  from  men  of  practical 
and  business  experience  would  help  me,  the  Minister 
in  this  matter.  Therefore,  I  propose  to  take  such  ad- 
vice— of  men  as  free  from  any  kind  of  political  and 
electoral  pressure,  as  they  should  be  free  from  any 
departmental  influence.  I  should  suggest  a  body  of 
five  to  report  for  my  advice  and  information  on  the 
wages  paid  in  the  Post  Office  Department  to  the  four 
great  classes  of  employees,  the  letter  sorters  and  the 
telegraphists  in  London,  and  the  letter  sorters  and  the 
telegraphists  in  the  provinces." 

After  reiterating  that  he  proposed  to  get  the  advice 
of  business  men  only  on  the  question  of  the  scale  of 
wages  paid  in  the  Post  Office  Department,  and  that  he 
in  no  way  proposed  to  surrender  to  any  Committee  of 
any  sort  the  general  duties  of  the  Postmaster  General, 
Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain  closed  with  the  words :  "I  ask 
the  Committee  [of  Supply]  to  give  me  all  the  con- 
fidence it  can,  and  when  it  is  unable  to  give  me  that 
confidence,  I  say  that  that  is  no  reason  for  granting  a 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  211 

Select  Committee  to  do  my  work,  but  only  a  reason 
for  transferring  the  office  of  Postmaster  General  to 
some  one  who  is  more  competent." 

Mr.  Thomas  Bayley  replied  that  "he  was  not  willing 
to  give  up  the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  whose  duty  it  was  to  remedy  the  grievances 

of  the  public  service And  although  he  had  been 

assured  by  those  whom  he  represented  [i.  e.,  post 
office  servants]  that  the  Post  Office  officials  would 
loyally  abide  by  the  decision  of  a  Committee  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  the  Right  Honorable  Gentleman 
[the  Postmaster  General]  could  not  expect  the  same 
loyalty  with  regard  to  the  decision  of  the  Committee 
he  proposed  to  appoint." 

Sir  Albert  Rollit  said:  "The  Tweedmouth  Com- 
mittee was  a  one-sided  tribunal;  the  officials  were 
represented  on  it,  but  the  men  not  at  all " 

Captain  Norton  replied:  "The  Right  Honorable 
Gentleman  had  also  referred  to  the  question  of  Mem- 
bers on  both  sides  of  the  House  coming  to  him  for 
protection.  That  was  very  startling,  because  the  rea- 
son they  were  there  at  all  was  that  they  might  repre- 
sent every  section  of  their  constituents,^  ....  but 
presuming  the  Post  Office  servants  were  organized,  he 


*  According  to  The  Times,  May  ii,  1903,  Captain  Norton  said: 
"The  Right  Honorable  Gentleman  had  told  a  startling  story  of  how 
Members  on  both  sides  of  the  House  had  appealed  to  him  to  protect 
them  from  the  postal  servants.  Members  of  the  House  represented 
all  sections  in  their  constituencies  and  surely  postal  servants  as 
voters  had  the  right  to  approach  their  representatives,  and  apply  the 
same  kind  of  pressure  that  other  organized  bodies  applied," 


212  1HE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

submitted  they  were  within  their  rights  to  appeal  to 

their    Members If    the    postal    officials    were 

such  terrible  tyrants  he  hoped  they  would  take  note 
that  they  could  never  hope  for  fair  play  from  the  pres- 
ent Government.  The  Right  Honorable  Gentleman 
had  appointed  a  packed  jury  of  five  individuals  to  deal 

with  a  fraction  of  the  question In  other  words, 

he  was  going  to  take  shelter  behind  this  bogus  com- 
mittee  He  was  going  to  appoint  five  Mem- 
bers,   possibly    sweaters,    to    determine    the    rate    of 

wages It  would  be  astounding  if  the  postal 

officials  accepted  any  such  bogus  arbitration.  If  it 
was  to  be  a  Board  of  Arbitration,  why  should  not  they 
have  five  postal  servants  added  to  the  five  employers 
of  labor?"  Captain  Norton  is  a  Junior  Lord  of  the 
Treasury  in  the  present  Sir  Henry  Campbell-Banner- 
man  Ministry. 

On  May  17,  1903,  the  National  Joint  Committee  of 
the  Postal  Association  unanimously  resolved:  "That 
this  National  Joint  Committee  views  with  extreme  dis- 
satisfaction the  appointment  of  a  Court  of  Inquiry 
which  is  not  composed  of  members  of  Parliament,  but 
is  an  altogether  irresponsible  body,  and  protests  against 
the  scope  of  the  inquiry  being  limited  to  a  single  griev- 
ance and  to  a  minority  of  the  Staff.  It  pledges  itself 
to  continue  to  use  every  legitimate  endeavor  to  obtain 
an  impartial  Parliamentary  Committee  of  Inquiry  into 
the  causes  of  discontent  in  the  postal  and  telegraph 
service.^ 

^The  Times,  May  18,  1903. 


PRESS  FOR  INCREASES  OF  WAGES  213 

In  August,  1903,  the  Postmaster  General  appointed 
a  ' 'Committee  to  inquire  into  the  adequacy  of  the  wages 
paid  to  certain  classes  of  the  postal  servants."  The 
Committee  consisted  of:  Sir  Edward  Bradford,  until 
lately  Chief  Commissioner  of  the  Metropolitan  Police; 
Mr.  Charles  Booth,  a  Liverpool  Merchant,  and  the 
author  of  "The  Life  and  Labor  of  the  People  in  Lon- 
don ;"  Mr.  Samuel  Fay,  General  Manager  of  the  Great 
Central  Railway;  Mr.  Thomas  Brodrick,  Secretary  of 
the  Co-operative  Wholesale  Society,  Manchester;  and 
Mr.  R.  Burbridge,  Managing  Director  of  Harrod's 
Stores.^ 

^The  Times  J  August  14,  1903, 


CHAPTER  XII 
THE  BRADFORD  COMMITTEE  REPORT 

The  Bradford  Committee  ignores  its  reference.  It  recom- 
mends measures  that  would  cost  $6,500,000  a  year,  in  the  hope  of 
satisfying  the  postal  employees,  who  had  asked  for  $12,500,000  a 
year.  Lord  Stanley,  Postmaster  General,  rejects  the  Bradford 
Committee's  Report;  but  grants  increases  in  wages  and  salaries 
aggregating  $1,861,500  a  year. 

In  the  preceding  chapter  it  was  stated  that  the  Gov- 
ernment in  August,  1903,  appointed  Sir  Edward  Brad- 
ford, Mr.  Charles  Booth,  Mr.  Thomas  Brodrick,  Mr. 
R.  Burbidge,  and  Mr.  Samuel  Fay  a  Committee  "to 
inquire  into  the  scales  of  pay  received  by  the  under- 
mentioned classes  of  Established  Post  Office  Servants, 
and  to  report  whether,  having  regard  to  the  conditions 
of  their  employment  and  to  the  rates  current  in  other 
occupations,  the  remuneration  of  (a)  Postmen,  (b) 
Sorters  (London),  (c)  Telegraphists  (London),  (d) 
Sorting  Clerks  and  Telegraphists  (Provincial)  is  ade- 
quate." No  further  question  was  submitted  to  the 
Committee. 

The  Committee,  in  May,  1904,  reported:  "We  have 
not  seen  our  way  to  obtain  any  specific  evidence  as  to 
the  comparative  rates  of  wages  current  in  other  occu- 

214 


I 


THE  BRADFORD  COMMITTEE  REPORT    215 

pations.  So  far  as  regards  this  portion  of  the  refer- 
ence to  us/  we  came  to  the  conclusion  that  no  really 
useful  purpose  would  be  served  by  asking  employers 
of  labor  to  furnish  precise  details  of  the  wages  paid  by 
them.  Certain  official  information  is  already  avail- 
able, being  obtained  and  published  from  time  to  time 
by  the  Board  of  Trade.  This  information,  supple- 
mented by  our  own  experience,  affords  more  reliable 
data  than  any  particulars  we  could  hope  to  obtain  in 
the  way  of  evidence  within  the  limits  of  an  inquiry  of 
reasonable  duration. 

"Moreover,  it  is  difficult  to  make  any  valid  compari- 
son between  a  National  Postal  Service  and  any  form 
Business  Methods  ^^  P^i^^te  industrial  employment,  the 
not  applicable  in  entire  conditions  being  necessarily  so 
State  Service  different ;  payment  by  results  and  pro- 
motion or  dismissal  according  to  the  will  of  the  em- 
ployer being  inapplicable  if  not  impossible  under  the 
State.  "2 

The  Committee's  report  covers  nineteen  pages,  but 
only  these  two  paragraphs  are  in  answer  to  the  refer- 
ence given  to  the  Committee.  In  them  the  Committee 
reports  its  failure;  and  with  that  report  of  failure  the 
Committee  should  have  contented  itself,  under  all  of 
the  rules  of  procedure  governing  Committees  and  Com- 
missions appointed  by  the  British  Government.     But 


*  There  was  no  reference  but  that  one. 

'^Report  and  Appendices  of  the  Committee  appointed  to  inquire 
into  Post  OfUce  Wages,  1904. 


216  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  Committee  ignored  the  estabhshed  rules  of  pro- 
cedure, roamed  about  at  will,  and  reopened  many  of 
the  questions  settled  by  the  Tweedmouth  Committee, 
which  had  sat  two  years,  and  had  taken  upward  of  a 
thousand  closely  printed  folio  pages  of  evidence.  The 
Bradford  Committee  did  this  in  violation  of  the  es- 
tablished usage  of  the  country,  as  well  as  in  spite  of 
the  fact  that  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Postmaster 
General,  had  closed  the  speech  in  which  he  announced 
his  resolve  to  appoint  the  Committee,  with  the  words 
that  he  wanted  advice  on  the  question  of  comparative 
wages  only  and  that  he  refused  to  transfer  to  "any 
Committee  the  duty  of  regulating  in  all  its  details  the 
daily  administration  and  work  of  the  Post  Office." 

Upon  the  Report  of  the  Committee,  The  Economist^ 
(London)  commented  as  follows :  "This  Committee 
was  asked  to  compare  the  wages  of  Post  Office  serv- 
ants with  those  paid  for  corresponding  work  outside. 
Their  answer  was,  in  effect,  that  no  such  comparison 
could  be  instituted.  Why,  when  postal  servants  are 
taken  from  various  ascertained  classes  [of  society],  it 
should  be  impossible  to  compare  their  pay  with  that 
ordinarily  received  by  the  same  classes  in  other  em- 
ployments is  not  obvious.  What  is  obvious  is  that  the 
Committee  either  mistook  the  inquiry  entrusted  to 
them,  or  did  not  choose  to  enter  upon  it." 

The  Times^  said :  "The  reference  here  is  explicit,  .  . 

*  September  17,  1904. 
'September  12,  1904. 


THE  BRADFORD  COMMITTEE  REPORT    217 

The  specific  question  they  were  asked  was  the  ques- 
tion to  which,  as  our  Correspondent  says,  the  taxpayer 
really  wants  an  answer — namely,  are  postal  servants 
fairly  paid . .  . .  ?  This  question  the  Committee  has 
neither  answered  nor  attempted  to  answer.  Passing 
by  the  terms  of  reference  altogether,  the  Report  de- 
clares that  *it  is  difficult' ....  But,  as  an  answer  to  the 
specific  question  addressed  to  the  Committee;  it  is,  in 
our  judgment,  in  the  literal  sense  of  the  word,  im- 
pertinent. However,  having  rejected  the  criterion 
propounded  to  them  by  the  Postmaster  General,  the 
Committee   proposed    to   apply    a    criterion   of   their 

own " 

The  Committee  made  some  general  statements  as  to 
the  rates  of  wages  that  should  prevail  in  the  public 
service.  They  were :  "We  think  that  Postal  employees 
are  justified  in  resting  their  claims  to  remuneration  on 
the  responsible  and  exacting^  character  of  the  duties 
performed  and  on  the  social  position  they  fill  as  serv- 
ants of  the  State.  The  State,  for  its  part,  does  right 
in  taking  an  independent  course  guided  by  principles 
of  its  own,  irrespective  of  what  others  may  do ;  neither 
following  an  example  nor  pretending  to  set  one.  It 
must  always  be  remembered  that  in  the  working  of  a 


"^Report  of  the  Bradford  Committee  on  Post  Office  Wages,  1904, 
p.  198. 

Dr.  A.  H.  Wilson,  Chief  Medical  Officer  of  the  Post  Office,  tes- 
tified: "When  cases  of  breakdown  have  been  brought  to  my  notice 
I  have  invariably  found  the  primary  origin  of  the  illness  to  have 
been  due  to  causes  outside  Post  Office  life.  These  causes  are  gen- 
erally drink,  financial  worry,  domestic  troubles,  etc." 


218  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

monopoly  by  the  State,  the  interest  of  the  public  as  a 
whole  is  the  paramount  consideration,  and  every  econ- 
omy consistent  with  efficiency  must  be  adopted.  The 
terms  offered  by  the  State  should,  however,  be  such  as 
to  secure  men  and  women  of  the  requisite  character 
and  capacity  and  ought  to  be  such  as  will  insure  the  re- 
sponse of  hearty  service."  If  one  seeks  to  find  in  the 
foregoing  statements  an  answer  to  the  very  matter-of- 
fact  question  whether  the  postal  servants'  wages  are 
too  high  or  too  low,  compared  with  wages  in  outside 
employment,  he  will  have  to  conclude,  with  Alice  in 
Wonderland,  that  "it  seems  very  pretty,  but  it's  rather 
hard  to  understand ;  somehow  it  seems  to  fill  my  head 
with  ideas,  only  I  don't  know  exactly  what  they  are." 
The  Committee  concluded  with  the  statement  that 
the  adequacy  of  the  wages  obtaining  among  the  postal 
employees  could  be  tested  by  the  numbers  and  charac- 
ter of  those  who  offered  themselves;  by  the  capacity 
they  showed  on  trial ;  and  finally,  by  their  contentment. 
It  found  that  there  was  no  lack  of  suitable  candidates ; 
that  there  was  no  complaint  as  to  their  capacity;  but 
that  there  was  widespread  discontent.  It  added  that 
the  Tweedmouth  and  Norfolk-Hanbury  settlements 
did  not  give  satisfaction  at  the  time ;  and  that  that  dis- 
satisfaction had  been  "aggravated  by  the  general  rise 
in  wages  and  prices  and  in  the  standard  of  life  which 
took  place  to  some  extent  even  during  the  two  years 
occupied  by  the  Tweedmouth  inquiry  (1895  and  1896) 
and   had   continued   since,   culminating,   however,   in 


THE  BRADFORD  COMMITTEE  REPORT    219 

1900,  since  when  there  has  been  some  sHght  reaction. 
The  same  period  has  seen  a  great  development  of  Postal 
and  Telegraph  business,  causing  greater  pressure  of 
work.  This  has  been  combined  with  lower  charges 
to  the  public  and  a  considerable  increase  in  Postal 
Revenue.  We  therefore  consider  there  is  a  just  claim 
for  revision." 

Taking  these  statements  in  their  order,  one  finds, 
first  of  all,  that  the  Committee  took  no  evidence  on  the 
question  how  Post  Office  wages  had  compared  with 
wages  in  outside  employment  previous  to  the  rise  in 
wages  and  prices  in  the  period  from  1895  to  1900,  nor 
on  the  question  of  the  rise  in  wages  in  the  Post  Office 
Service  in  1896  to  1900,  compared  with  the  rise  in 
wages  in  outside  employment  and  in  prices  in  1895  to 
1900.  The  first  statement  of  the  Committee,  there- 
fore, was  supported  by  no  evidence,  it  was  a  mere  asser- 
tion. The  second  statement,  namely,  that  the  growth 
of  the  Postal  and  Telegraph  business  had  caused 
greater  pressure  of  work,  also  was  not  supported  by 
evidence.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  absolutely  essen- 
tial that  such  a  statement  should  be  supported  by  evi- 
dence, because  it  is  a  fact  that  in  both  branches  of  the 
Postal  Service  the  policy  obtains  of  having  so  large  a 
body  of  employees  "that  the  maximum  of  work,  as  a 
rule,  can  be  dealt  with  without  undue  pressure."^  As  to 
the  Post  Office  having  lowered  its  charges  to  the  public 
in  the  period  from  1895  to  1900,  it  is  to  be  said,  first, 

'Compare  Chapter  XT,  testimony  of  Mr,  Kerry. 


220  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

that  it  does  not  follow  therefrom  that  wages  should  be 
raised;  and  second,  that  the  penny  rate  on  domestic 
letters  was  not  lowered,  and  that  the  carriage  of  penny- 
letters  is  the  only  work  upon  which  the  Post  Office 
makes  a  profit.^  Finally,  as  to  the  statement  that  there 
had  been,  in  1895  to  1904,  "a  considerable  increase  in 
Postal  Revenue,"  the  facts  are,  first,  that  the  net  reve- 
nue of  the  Post  Office  as  a  whole  increased  from  $14,- 
640,000  in  1895,  to  $18,166,000  in  1896,  and  to  $18,- 
781,000  in  1897;  but  that  in  the  subsequent  years,  1898 
to  1904,  it  did  not  again  reach  the  high-water  mark  of 
1897,  and  averaged  $17,642,000.  Second,  that  in 
the  period,  from  1895  to  1904,  the  Telegraph  Branch 
did  not  earn  operating  expenses,  the  expenses  on  ac- 
count of  wages  and  salaries  having  risen  from  11.9 
cents  per  telegram  in  1897,  to  13.7  cents  in  1904.  That 
is  a  matter  of  importance,  for  the  recommendations 
of  the  Committee  extended  to  the  Telegraph  Branch  as 
well  as  to  the  Postal  Branch  proper.  Again,  the  Com- 
mittee had  stated  that  "in  the  working  of  a  monopoly 
by  the  State,  the  interest  of  the  public  as  a  whole  is  the 
paramount  consideration,  and  every  economy  consist- 
ent with  efficiency  must  be  adopted."  In  the  20  years 
ending  with  1903,  the  proportion  of  the  Post  Office's 
gross  revenue  available  for  defraying  the  general  ex- 
penses of  the  State  had  declined  steadily  from  33  per 
cent,  to  20  per  cent.^     Still,  again,  in  the  year  1903, 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  27,  1900,  pp.  229  and 
136;  Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  May  11,  p.  342;  Mr.  Austen 
Chamberlain,  Postmaster  General. 


THE  BRADFORD  COMMITTEE  REPORT    221 

the  expenses  of  the  Post  Office  had  been  increased  by 
$3,000,000  through  the  Tweedmouth  and  Norfolk- 
Hanbury  settlements.^  In  the  face  of  those  facts,  the 
Bradford  Committee  made  recommendations  that  Lord 
Stanley,  Postmaster  General,  said  would  cost  $6,500,- 
000  a  year.2  'pj^g  Bradford  Committee  sought  to  jus- 
tify its  recommendations  with  the  simple  statement 
that  there  was  "widespread  discontent"  among  the 
Postal  employees.  The  Postal  employees  themselves 
had  made  demands  before  the  Committee  that  would 
have  called  for  the  expenditure  of  an  additional  $12,- 
500,000  a  year.  Their  attitude  to  the  Committee's 
amiable  proposal  to  conciliate  them  by  giving  them 
$6,500,000  a  year,  is  shown  in  the  subjoined  extract 
from  the  official  organ  of  the  telegraph  staff.  "It  is 
perfectly  plain, ....  that  the  recommendations  of  the 
Committee,  well-meaning  as  we  frankly  admit  them 
to  be,  cannot  be  accepted  as  a  full  settlement  of  the 
case  of  the  Post  Office  workers,  or  as  one  carrying  with 
it  the  character  of  finality.  They  can  only  be  accepted 
as  an  instalment  of  a  long  overdue  account ;  and  Postal 
Telegraphists,  even  if  they  have  to  fight  alone  for  their 
own  hand  in  the  future  as  they  did  for  many  long  years 
in  the  past,  will  combine  for  the  payment  of  the  bal- 


^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  20,  1903,  p.  1,022; 
Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Postmaster  General. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  6,  1905,  p.  1,390;  Lord 
Stanley. 

^The  Tim.es,  September  17,  1904:  Correspondence. 


222  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

That  a  body  of  five  men,  of  whom  four  were  respect- 
ively a  Liverpool  merchant  and  ship  owner,  a  general 
manager  of  a  railway,  a  manager  of  a  large  wholesale 
cooperative  society,  and  a  manager  of  a  large  depart- 
ment store,  could  make  a  Report  such  as  the  foregoing 
one,  affords  a  melancholy  illustration  of  the  fact  that 
no  matter  how  far  popular  governments  may  go  in  as- 
suming the  conduct  of  great  business  enterprises,  they 
never  will  succeed  in  creating  a  public  opinion  that  will 
sustain  them  in  their  efforts  to  conduct  their  business 
ventures  on  the  commonly  accepted  principles  of  the 
business  world. 

In  the  House  of  Commons,  Lord  Stanley,  the  Post- 
master General,  said :  "As  to  the  Committee's  Report, 
it  did  not  comply  with  the  reference,  because  no  com- 
parison was  made  with  the  rates  of  pay  in  other  oc- 
cupations ....  but  they  conclude  that  as  there  was  dis- 
content there  ought  to  be  an  increase  of  wages.  That 
was  a  direct  premium  on  discontent,  a  direct  encour- 
agement to  the  employees  to  say  among  themselves  that 
if  they  were  to  be  discontented  and  to  agitate,  they 
would  get  more  in  the  future.  The  Committee,  on  the 
other  hand,  went  outside  the  reference,  because  they 
proposed  a  complete  reorganization  of  the  Post  Office, 
including  overseers,  who  were  not  referred  to  in  the 
reference.     On  this  particular  subject  they  took  no 

evidence Since  the  employees  of  the  Post  Office 

had  said  in  a  circular:  *We  wish  to  make  it  perfectly 


THE  BRADFORD  COMMITTEE  REPORT    223 

clear  that  we  do  not  regard  the  Committee  as  in  any 
sense  an  arbitration  board/  that  was  rather  against  the 
argument  that  the  Report  ought  to  be  accepted  as  an 
arbitration  award.  He  did  not  complain  of  the  ordi- 
nary circulars  of  the  employees  [sent  to  Members  of 
Parliament],  but  he  did  object  to  one  circular  [sent  to 
every  Member  of  the  House  of  Commons],  at  the 
bottom  of  which  was  a  paragraph,  which  could  be  torn 
off,  for  Members  to  sign  [and  mail  to  the  Postmaster 
General],  informing  him  [the  Postmaster  General] 
that  he  ought  to  do  this  or  that.^     That  [circular]  he 

[Lord  Stanley]  would  not  receive Coming  to  the 

main  question,  he  thought  it  was  obvious  that  it  was 
impossible  for  either  side  when  in  power  to  go  on  for 
long  being  swayed  in  all  these  questions  of  increases  of 
wages  by  any  pressure,  political  or  otherwise,  that 
might  be  put  upon  them.  [Cheers.]  The  Post  Office 
was  not  the  only  party  concerned.  There  was  not  a 
class  employed  by  the  Government,  who,  if  it  saw  an- 
other class  getting  an  increase  of  wages  by  agitation, 
would  not  try  the  same  method.  He  supported  cor- 
dially the  suggestion  which  had  been  made  in  the  de- 
bate that  all  questions  of  pay  of  employees  of  the  Gov- 
ernment should  not  be  referred  to  the  House,  but 
referred  to  some  judicial  body  on  whom  no  outside  in- 
fluence could  be  brought  to  bear,  who  would  look  at 

• 

^The  Times,  September  12,  1904,  denominated  this  episode  "a 
melancholy  and  even  ominous  illustration  of  the  process  of  demo- 
cratic degeneration."  In  the  same  issue  Mr.  S.  W.  Belderson  writes 
that  130  Members  of  the  House  signed  the  paragraph  in  question. 


224  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  matter  in  dispute  as  between  employer  and  em- 
ployee with  the  object  of  giving  to  the  employee  the 
wages  which  in  the  open  market  a  good  employer 
would  give,  while  at  the  same  time  protecting  the  mas- 
ter— in  this  case  the  State — from  any  outside  influ- 
ence."^ In  conclusion,  Lord  Stanley  made  the  state- 
ment that  the  adoption  of  the  Committee's  Report 
would  cost  "well  over  $5,000,000  a  year." 

Sir  Albert  Rollit  acted  as  the  spokesman  of  the  Pos- 
tal employees.  He  is  a  Solicitor  in  Mincing  Lane  and 
at  Hull;  a  steamship  owner  at  Hull,  Newcastle  and 
London;  and  a  Director  in  the  National  Telephone 
Company,  which  pays  its  employees  materially  less 
than  the  Post  Office  pays  the  employees  of  the  Post 
Office  Telephone  system.^  He  has  been  President  of 
the  Associated  Chambers  of  Commerce  of  the  United 
Kingdom,  as  well  as  of  the  London  and  Hull  Chambers 
of  Commerce.  He  was  Mayor  of  Hull  from  1883  to 
1885  y  ^^^  for  several  years  past  he  has  been  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  Association  of  Municipal  Corporations. 
Sir  Albert  K.  Rollit  was  not  re-elected  to  Parliament 
in  the  General  Election  of  January,  1906 ;  and  in  the 
following  March,  the  Postal  Telegraph  Clerks'  Asso- 
ciation passed  a  resolution  "expressing  appreciation  of 
the  services  rendered  to  the  Postal  movement  in  and 
out  of  Parliament  by  Sir  Albert  K.  Rollit,  and  regret 

^The  Times,  August  lo,  1904. 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  13,804;  Mr.  S.  Walpole,  Permanent  Secre- 
tary of  the  Post  Office. 


THE  BRADFORD  COMMITTEE  REPORT    225 

that  they  were  no  longer  able  to  command  his  cham- 
pionship in  the  House  of  Commons."^ 

After  the  Balfour  Government  had  rejected  the  Re- 
port of  the  Bradford  Committee,  in  the  interest  of  the 
taxpayers,  Lord  Stanley,  Postmaster  General,  insti- 
tuted "a  careful  comparison  between  Post  Office  wages 
and  those  current  in  other  employments;  and,  as  the 
result  of  the  comparison,  he  felt  justified  in  recom- 
mending to  the  Lords  Commissioners  of  His  Majesty's 
Treasury  certain  improvements  of  pay  "aggregating 
$1,861,500  a  year.^  The  improvements  of  pay  were 
granted  to  sorters,  telegraphists,  sorting  clerks  and 
telegraphists,  postmen,  assistant  and  auxiliary  post- 
men, and  various  smaller  classes  throughout  the  United 
Kingdom. 

^The  Times,  March  17,  1906;  and  Who's  Who,  1905. 
^Fifty-first  Report  of  the  Postmaster  General,  1905. 


IS 


CHAPTER  XIII 

THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  SELECT  COMMITTEE  ON 
POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS,  1906 

The  Post  Office  Civil  Servants'  Unions  demand  the  adoption 
of  the  Bradford  Committee  Report.  Lord  Stanley,  Postmaster 
General,  applies  the  words  "blackmail"  and  "blood-sucking"  to 
the  postal  employees'  methods.  Captain  Norton  moves  for  a 
House  of  Commons  Select  Committee.  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain, 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  in  vain  asks  the  Opposition  Party's 
support .  for  a  Select  Committee  to  which  shall  be  referred  the 
question  of  the  feasibility  of  establishing  a  permanent,  non- 
political  Commission  which  shall  establish  general  principles  for 
settling  disputes  between  the  Civil  Servants  and  the  Government 
of  the  day.  Captain  Norton's  Motion  is  lost,  nine  Ministerial 
supporters  voting  for  it,  and  only  two  Opposition  members  voting 
against  it.  Mr.  J.  Henniker  Heaton's  appeal  to  the  British  public 
for  "An  End  to  Political  Patronage."  The  Post  Office  employees, 
in  the  campaign  preceding  the  General  Election  of  January,  1906, 
induce  nearly  450  of  the  670  parliamentary  candidates  who  suc- 
ceeded in  being  elected,  to  pledge  themselves  to  vote  for  a  House 
of  Commons  Select  Committee  on  Post  Office  Wages.  Im- 
mediately upon  the  opening  of  Parliament,  the  Sir  H.  Campbell- 
Bannerman  Liberal  Ministry  gives  the  Post  Office  employees  a 
House  of  Commons  Select  Committee. 

On  September  17,  1904,  the  Postal  Telegraph  Clerks' 
Association  unanimously  resolved :  "That  this  Confer- 
ence expresses  its  indignation  that  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral, having  appointed  a  Committee  of  his  own  choos- 
ing to  inquire  into  the  Post  Office  wages now,  for 

226 


COMMITTEE  ON  POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS      227 

no  good  reason,  has  rejected  the  Report.  This  Con- 
ference, therefore,  calls  upon  the  Postmaster  General 
to  adopt  immediately,  as  dated  from  May  9,  1904,  the 
whole  of  the  ameliorative  recommendations  contained 
in  the  Bradford  Committee's  Report;  but  the  Postal 
Telegraph  Clerks'  Association  reserves  to  itself  the 
right  to  object  to,  and  protest  against,  any  recom- 
mendations v^hich  may  be  considered  by  this  Associa- 
tion to  be  of  a  restrictive  and  retrograde  character."^ 
In  the  evening  of  the  same  day  a  mass  meeting  was 
addressed  by  Mr.  W.  W.  Rutherford,  M.  P.,  the  head 
of  the  firm  of  Miller,  Peel,  Hughes  and  Rutherford, 
A  Merchant  Liverpool.  Mr.  Rutherford  had  been 
in  Politics  Lord    Mayor    of   Liverpool    in    1902. 

He  said :  "He  ventured  to  think  that  the  great  Postal 
and  Telegraph  Service  was  suffering  because  its  posi- 
tion and  its  grievances  had  not  been  made  thoroughly 

intelligible  to  the  general  public That  was  not  a 

matter  touching  a  few  hundreds  of  people  in  a  hole  and 
corner  of  the  country,  but  was  one  of  extreme  impor- 
tance affecting  no  less  than  185,000  people. . .  .The  real 
foes  of  the  employees  were  the  highly  paid  officials  at 
the  head  of  the  Department,  who  were  quite  content  to 
draw  their  salaries  and  show  that  the  Government  was 
making  four  or  five  million  pounds  sterling^  out  of  the 
public  and  the  Postal  Service." 

^The  Times,  September  19,  1904. 

^The  apparent  net  profits  of  the  Post  Office  Department  average 
about  $18,500,000  a  year.  Those  profits  are  subject  to  the  correction 
that  the  Post  Office  does  not  charge  itself  with  interest  and  de- 
preciation upon  its  capital  investment,  which  cannot  be  ascertained, 
but  must  be  very  large. 


228  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Mr.  Rutherford's  speech  recalls  to  mind  the  fact 
that  the  Australian  cousins  of  the  British  civil  servants 
have  learned  to  deal  with  their  "foes"  by  compelling 
the  popular  branches  of  the  Australian  Parliaments  to 
reduce  the  salaries  of  offensive  officials,  or  to  drive 
them  out  of  the  Service  by  means  of  "fishing"  Par- 
liamentary Committees,  appointed  to  report  on — ^and 
to  condemn — the  offending  officials. 

On  August  14,  1904,  the  London  Branch  of  the 
Postal  Telegraph  Clerks'  Association  held  a  meeting, 
at  which  Mr.  C.  H.  Garland,^  the  Secretary,  spoke  of 
Mr.  Thomas  Bayley,  M.  P.,  as  one  who  "had  rendered 
valuable  service  to  their  cause  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons." The  presiding  officer,  Mr.  R.  H.  Davis,  said : 
*Tn  burking  the  recommendations  of  the  Committee 
they  could  not  help  feeling  that  the  Post  Office  author- 
ities had  been  guilty  of  a  breach  of  faith.  Were  they 
going  to  take  the  rebuff  lying  down?  The  London 
Committee  were  determined  to  fight  the  matter  harder 
than  ever.  By  the  time  Parliament  assembled  next 
year,  they  would  have  an  effective  organization  at  their 
disposal,  and  the  enemy  would  feel  their  pressure  very 
considerably."^ 

The  Special  Conference  of  the  Postal  Telegraph 
Clerks'  Association  held  on  September  17,  1904,  re- 


^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  lo,  1890,  p.  342. 
Mr.  McCartan  asks  the  Postmaster  General  "on  what  grounds  Messrs. 
C.  Hughes  and  C.  H.  Garland  were  recently  punished."  ....  The 
intervention  was  repeated  on  March  14,  p.  865. 

'  The  Times,  August  25,  1904. 


COMMITTEE  ON  POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS      229 

solved  to  hold  mass  meetings  in  all  the  district  centres 
between  then  and  next  February  [opening  of  Parlia- 
ment] to  protest  against  the  action  of  the  Postmaster 
General.  The  series  to  conclude  with  a  "monster" 
demonstration  in  London  immediately  before  the  open- 
ing of  Parliament/ 

« 
On  July  6,  1905,  while  the  House  of  Commons  was 
in  Committee  of  Supply,  and  was  considering  the  vote 
upon  the  Post  Office,  there  was  a  long  and  instructive 
debate  upon  the  Report  of  the  Bradford  Committee.^ 
Lord  Stanley,  Postmaster  General,  opened  the  debate 
with  a  quotation  from  The  Post,^  the  Post  Office  em- 
ployees' organ.  The  statement  quoted  read:  "Not 
only  do  we  object  to  the  composition  of  the  [Bradford] 
Committee,  but  we  take  the  strongest  exception  to  its 
terms  of  reference.  The  inquiry  as  to  whether  our 
wages  are  adequate  or  otherwise  becomes  a  farce  if 
their  adequacy  is  to  be  judged  by  the  standard  of  wages 
of  the  open  labor  market.  No  such  comparison  would 
be  reasonable  or  fair.  There  is  no  other  employer  who 
fixes  his  own  prices  or  makes  an  annual  profit  of  $20,- 
000,000.  There  is  no  other  class  of  work  which  can 
be  compared  to  the  Post  Office  work,  neither  any  other 
employee  who  can  be  compared  with  the  Post  Office 
servants Surely  Mr.  Chamberlain  does  not  think 

*  The  Times,  September  19,  1904. 
'^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July   6,   190S,  p.^ 
following. 

'  August  29,  1903. 


230  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

we  should  regard  such  an  inquiry  as  final.  If  he  does, 
the  sooner  his  mind  is  disabused  the  better."  Lord 
Stanley  next  discussed  the  manner  in  which  the  Brad- 
ford Committee  had  made  recommendations  which  were 
based  on  no  evidence  whatever.  For  instance,  in  order 
to  improve  the  chances  of  promotion,  the  Committee 
had  recommended  the  creation  of  additional  higher 
posts —  "for  which  there  was  no  work."  In  one  Depart- 
ment of  the  Post  Office  that  recommendation  would 
mean  the  increase  in  the  number  of  overseers  from  250 
to  900.  Lord  Stanley  next  made  lengthy  comparisons 
between  the  wages  received  by  letter  sorters  and  teleg- 
raphists on  the  one  hand,  and  employees  of  equal  in- 
telligence and  attainments  in  the  service  of  private 
companies  on  the  other  hand.  He  showed  that  in 
London  the  maximum  wage  of  the  sorters  and  teleg- 
raphists was  equal  to  the  salary  of  the  "non-college- 
trained  certified  teacher,"  and  that  in  such  provincial 
cities  as  Hull,  Swansea  and  Exeter  it  was  larger. 
"The  only  comparison  which  was  not  entirely  upon  his 
[the  Postmaster  General's]  side  was  that  with  the 
clerks  in  the  cable  companies,  who  were  paid  more  than 
the  Post  Office  cable  room  operators.  But  the  work 
of  the  cable  companies'  operators  was  more  arduous, 
and  there  was  liability  to  be  sent  abroad  at  any  mo- 
ment. But  he  had  granted  the  Post  Office  cable  room 
operators  an  increase  of  pay."  He  added  that  the 
ultimate  aggregate  cost  of  the  increases  in  pay  made 
since  the  publication  of  the  Bradford  Committee's  Re- 
port would  be  $642,000  a  year.* 

*In  his  annual  Report,  dated  July  28,  1905,  Lord  Stanley  stated 
that  the  ultimate  cost  would  be  $1,861,500  a  year. 


COMMITTEE  ON  POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS      231 

Lord  Stanley,  Postmaster  General,  concluded  as 
follows :  "But  he  would  ask  the  House  just  to  consider 
what  was  going  to  be  the  end  of  all  these  demands. 
This  was  really  a  question  worthy  of  consideration  on 
both  sides  of  the  House.  What  were  the  demands  on 
the  public  purse  for  this  particular  office?  It  would 
be  within  the  recollection  of  the  Committee  of  Supply 
that  at  a  deputation  to  his  Right  Honorable  Friend 
and  himself,  one  of  the  men  stated  that  he  thought  the 
whole  of  the  $20,000,000  profit,  as  he  regarded  it, 
made  by  the  Post  Office  employees,  ought  to  be  de- 
voted to  the  payment  of  those  employees ....  that  man 
made  a  deliberate  statement,  not  on  his  own  account, 
but  as  representing  a  particular  section  or  organization 
in  the  Department.  It  was  repudiated  by  others  pres- 
ent"   Lord  Stanley  next  stated  that  the  demands 

made  by  the  Post  Office  employees  before  the  Bradford 
Committee  would  have  called  for  $12,500,000  a  year. 
He  continued :  "Honorable  Members  knew  better  than 
he  how  they  were  being  bombarded  with 
lllelTmliel  applications  from  Post  Office  employees 
the  Terms  and  Other  classes  of  Civil  Servants  for 

"Blackmail"  and  increases  of  wages.  This  had  taken 
a  form  which  was  not  illegal,  but  which 
he  could  not  help  thinking  was  an  abuse  of  their  rights, 
to  wit,  the  form  of  a  political  threat.  They  had  cir- 
culated an  appeal  in  which  they  expressed  very  clearly 
and  very  frankly  their  intention,  and  it  was  one  of 
which  the  Committee  would  have  to  take  note  now,  or 


232  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

it  would  be  much  worse  in  the  future.  They  said: 
*Two-thirds  at  least  of  one  political  party  are  in  great 
fear  of  losing  their  seats.  The  swing  of  the  pendulum 
is  against  them,  and  any  Member  who  receives  40  or 
50  such  letters  will  under  present  circumstances  have 
to  consider  very  seriously  whether  on  this  question  he 
can  afford  to  go  into  the  wrong  lobby.  This  is  taking 
advantage  of  the  political  situation.'  It  was  indeed, 
but  it  was  abusing,  as  it  seemed  to  him,  their  rights  as 
voters.  It  was  nothing  more  nor  less  than  blackmail. 
It  was  nothing  more  nor  less  than  asking  Members  to 
purchase  votes  for  themselves  at  the  General  Election^ 
at  the  expense  of  the  Public  Exchequer.  Both  sides 
would  have  to  make  up  their  minds  that  some  means 
should  be  devised  by  which  there  should  not  be  this 
continual  blood-sucking  on  the  part  of  the  public  serv- 
ants. How  it  was  to  be  done,  was  not  for  him  to  say, 
but  he  had  suggested,  and  he  still  thought  that  there 
would  have  to  be  some  organization  outside  party  poli- 
tics altos^ether,  and  unconnected  with 
A  permanent  ^ 

non-political  ^^d  unmoved  by  Parliament  and  po- 

Tribunalsug-  litical  considerations,  to  whom  such 
^^^  ^  questions   should  be   referred  and  by 

whom  an  impartial  opinion  should  be  given He 

wanted  now  rather  to  anticipate  a  request  that  would 
probably  be  made  by  Honorable  Members  opposite — 
that  he  should  appoint  a  Parliamentary  Committee. 
To  that  request  he  would  have  to  give  a  negative  reply, 

*To  be  held  in  January,  1906. 


COMMITTEE  ON  POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS      233 

and  he  would  say  why.  First,  too  great  poHtical  pres- 
sure would  be  brought  to  bear  on  the  Committee; 
second,  the  whole  case  of  the  Post  Office  employees 
was  before  the  House  in  the  evidence  taken  by  the 
Bradford  Committee,  and  everybody  could  make  up  his 
mind  as  well  as  he  would  be  able  to  if  appointed  to  a 
Select  Committee.  Third,  he  would  not  throw  the  re- 
sponsibility on  to  a  Committee ;  it  was  his  place  to  bear 
it  himself." 

On  July  1 8,  Lord  Stanley,  Postmaster  General, 
stated  that  he  would  neither  withdraw  nor  modify  the 
epithets  "blackmail"  and  "blood-sucking"  which  he 
had  used.  He  stated  that  those  epithets  applied  "only 
to  those  who  by  speeches,  letters  or  circulars,  attempt 
unduly  to  influence  the  votes  of  Honorable  Members 
with  regard  to  the  questions  affecting  Post  Office 
wages,  and  to  those  who  associate  themselves  with 
such  action."* 

After  the  Postmaster  General  had  spoken,  Captain 
Norton  moved  a  reduction  of  the  Post  Office  Vote,  for 
the  purpose  of  drawing  attention  to  the  grievances  of 
long  standing  of  the  Post  Office  employees.  He  said : 
"As  regarded  what  had  been  said  about  undue  influ- 

Captain  Norton  ^^^^>  ^^^  contention  was  that  so  long 
on  Civil  Service  as  the  Postal  officials,  or  should  he 
Agitation  ggy  ti^^  members  of  the  Civil  Service, 

and  for  that  matter  the  members  of  the  fighting 
services  were  allowed  to  maintain  a  vote,  they  had  pre- 

^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  18,  1905,  p.  1,062. 


234  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

cisely  the  same  rights  as  all  other  voters  in  the  country 
to  exercise  their  fullest  influence  in  the  defense  of  their 
rights,  privileges  and  interests.  He  might  mention 
that  all  classes  of  all  communities,  all  professions,  all 
trades,  all  combinations  of  individuals,  such  as  anti- 
vaccinationists  and  so  forth,  had  invariably  used  their 
utmost  pressure  in  defense  of  their  interests  and  views 
upon  Members  of  the  House "^ 

Sir  Albert  K.  Rollit  supported  Captain  Norton's 
motion. 

The    Chancellor    of    the    Exchequer,    Mr.    Austen 

Chamberlain,  spoke  as  follows :  "The  question  at  issue 

was  not  one  between  the  two  political  parties.     It  was 

above  parties.     It  was  whether  there  was  to  be  good 

economical  government  in  the  country  at  all,  or  whether 

„       ,  ,     the  Civil  Servants  in  the  employment 
Chancellor  of  the  "^ 

Exchequer  asks  ^^  the  Crown  could  make  such  use  of 
for  non-Party  their  votes,  as  citizens,  for  the  purely 
selfish  purpose  of  forcing  the  public  to 
pay  more  for  their  services  and  so  increase  the  expen- 
diture of  a  great  Department  of  State.  He  did  not 
know  how  long  they  could  go  on  in  the  position  they 
had  now  reached,  under  which  pressure  was  brought 
to  bear  on  Honorable  Members  of  all  parties  by  their 
constituents.     He  was  certain  that  if  any  scheme  could 

be  devised so  that  they  might  take  this  question 

altogether  out  of  the  region  of  political  life — not  merely 
out  of  party  life,  but  out  of  Parliamentary  life — it 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  6,  1905,  p.  1,367. 


COMMITTEE  ON  POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS      235 

would  be  a  great  advantage.  It  would  tend  to  pre- 
serve the  Civil  Service  free  from  that  political  influ- 
ence and  independent  of  the  changing  fortunes  of 
party  which  had  been  their  great  boast  and  security  in 
the  past.  If  there  were  a  general  feeling  in  the  House 
that  an  object  of  that  kind  was  one  on  which  all  parties 
might  well  cooperate,  then  His  Majesty's  Government, 
while  maintaining  as  resolutely  as  they  had  in  past 
years  their  objection  to  referring  these  specific  griev- 
ances to  a  Select  Committee  appointed  in  the  ordinary 
way  for  that  particular  purpose,  would  be  prepared 
to  assent  to  the  appointment  of  a  Committee  of  this 
House  to  consider  the  state  of  affairs  which  had  arisen ; 
to  see  if  they  could  devise  some  remedy  for  it;  to  lay 
down  the  principles  by  which  they  should  be  governed 
in  these  matters;  and  to  advise  whether  it  would  be 
possible  to  establish  some  permanent  body  or  Com- 
mission, outside  the  sphere  of  electoral  pressure  and 
above  and  beyond  any  of  our  party  conflicts,  which 
might  advise  the  Government  in  applying  those  prin- 
ciples to  particular  cases.  Such  a  Committee  could, 
of  course,  only  be  successfully  conceded  with  the  good 
will  of  all  parties  in  the  House,  and  if  the  whole  House 
were  animated  by  a  desire,  if  possible,  to  set  this  ques- 
tion at  rest.  With  that  good  will,  he  thought,  it 
might  serve  a  useful  purpose.  The  object  to  be  at- 
tained was  of  such  vast  importance  that  he,  for  one, 
would  not  refuse  any  method  by  which  they  might 
hope  successfully  to  compass  it  and  to  maintain  the 


236  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Civil  Service  in  that  high  position  of  which,  with  its 
great  traditions,  they  had  such  just  cause  to  be  proud 
and  such  good  reason  to  be  grateful  for."^ 

Captain  Norton's  motion  was  lost  by  a  vote  of  249 
to  205.  The  House  divided  on  party  lines,  only  two 
Members  of  the  Opposition  voting  with  the  Govern- 
ment, and  only  nine  supporters  of  the  Government  vot- 
ing with  the  Opposition.2  Of  the  Members  of  the  Op- 
position who  voted  in  support  of  Captain  Norton's 
motion,  two  shortly  afterward  became  members  of  the 
Cabinet  in  Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman's  Liberal 
Ministry,  and  fifteen  others  became  members  of  the 
Ministry,    but   not   of   the  Cabinet,   or   inner   circle.^ 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  6,  1905,  p.  1,401. 

*  Ayes  Noes 

Conservatives           |^  Government 9  210 

Liberal  Unionists    \  Supporters o  37 

Liberals          )    The 138  2 

Nationalists  )   Opposition 49  o 

Various  factions 9  o 

205  249 

•  Name  Office 

Mr.  Herbert  Gladstone Home  Secretary 

Mr.  Lloyd  George President  of  Board  of  Trade 

Mr.  Thos.  Lough . .  Parliamentary  Sec'y  of  Board  of  Education 

Mr.  R.  McKenna Financial  Secretary  to  Treasury 

Mr.  J.  A.  Pease Junior  Lord  of  Treasury 

Mr.  J.   Herbert  Lewis Junior  Lord  of  Treasury 

Captain    Cecil    Norton Junior  Lord  of  Treasury 

Mr.    F.   Freman-Thomas Junior  Lord  of  Treasury 

Mr.  J.  M.  Fuller Junior  Lord  of  Treasury 

Mr.  R.  K.  Causton Paymaster  General 

Mr.  Geo.  Lambert Civil  Lord  of  Admiralty 

Mr.  Edward  Robertson Secretary  to  Admiralty 

Mr.  Herbert  Samuel Under  Home  Secretary 

Mr.  J.  E.  Ellis Under  Secretary  for  India 

Mr.  H.  E.  Kearley Secretary  of  Board  of  Trade 

Sir  Jno.  L.  Walton Attorney-General 

Mr.  Thos.  Shaw Lord  Advocate 


COMMITTEE  ON  POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS      237 

Captain  Norton  himself  became  one  of  the  four  Junior 
Lords  of  the  Treasury.  The  latter  functionaries  "are 
expected  to  gather  the  greatest  number  of  their  own 
party  into  every  division  [of  the  House  of  Commons] , 
and  by  persuasion,  promises,  explanation,  and  every 
available  expedient,  to  bring  their  men  from  all  quar- 
ters to  the  aid  of  the  Government  upon  any  emergency. 
It  is  also  their  business  to  conciliate  the  discontented 
and  doubtful  among  the  ministerial  supporters,  and  to 
keep  everyone,  as  far  as  possible,  in  good  humor."* 

In  The  Nineteenth  Century  and  After,  for  April, 
1906,  Mr.  J.  H.  Heaton,  in  an  article  entitled :  Wanted! 
An  End  to  Political  Patronage,  discussed  at  length 
some  of  the  after  effects  of  the  memorable  debate  of 
July  6,  1905.  Mr.  Heaton  had  been  returned  to  Par- 
liament from  Canterbury  in  1885,  1886,  1892,  1895, 
and  1900;  the  last  four  occasions  as  an  unopposed  can- 
didate. He  had  carried  the  Imperial  Penny  Postage 
Scheme  in  1888;  he  had  introduced  telegraph  money 
orders  in  England ;  the  parcel  post  to  France,  etc. ;  and 
the  freedom  of  the  City  of  London  in  a  gold  casket 
had  been  conferred  on  him  in  1899. 
A  Prime  ^^'  Heaton  opened  his  article  with 

Minister  on  the  the  Statement :  "Many  years  ago  a  great 
Civil  Service  pj.jj^g  Minister  wrote  to  me  as  fol- 
lows: 'There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  organized 
attempts  of  servants  of  the  State  to  use  their  political  in- 

*A.  Todd:  On  Parliamentary  Government  in  England, 


238  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

fluence  at  the  cost  of  the  taxpayer  is  likely  to  become  a 
serious  danger.  I  agree  with  you  in  thinking  that  it 
can  only  be  effectually  met  by  agreement  between  the 
two  sides  of  the  House.' "  Mr.  Heaton  continued : 
"The  Civil  Servants  of  the  Crown  are,  taken  as  a 
whole,  an  admirable  and  efficient  body  of  workers,  of 
whom  England  is  justifiably  proud,  and  whom — as 
was  held,  I  think,  by  the  late  Mr.  Gladstone — she  re- 
wards on  a  generous  scale ....  It  is  the  more  to  be  re- 
gretted that  large  classes  of  them  should  have  fallen 
into  the  hands  of  agitators,  who  incite  to  the  system- 
atic intimidation  of  Members  of  Parliament  with  a 
view  to  the  extortion  of  larger  and  larger  votes  [ap- 
propriations] for  salaries.  This  evil  is  rapidly  be- 
coming formidable Any  official  raising  the  cry  of 

'higher  wages'  is  sure  of  popularity  amting  his  fellows, 
who  instantly  regard  him  as  a  born  leader.  The 
pleasant  prospect  of  an  increase  of  income  without 
working  for  it  is  a  bait  that  never  fails  to  appeal  most 
strongly  to  the  least  energetic  and  deserving.  A  post- 
man or  dockyard  hand  finds  that  he  can  win  promotion 
and  increased  pay  only  by  strenuous  hard  work,  just  as 
if  he  were  a  mere  artisan  or  shop  assistant.  But  the 
agitators  point  out  that  he  can  attain  an  equivalent  re- 
sult by  bullying  the  local  M.  P.,  and  so  he  joins  the 
league  or  union  formed  for  the  purpose.  Where  is 
this  to  stop?    The  late  Sir  W.  Harcourt^  wrote  (to 

*  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  1886  an4  189:3-95. 


COMMITTEE  ON  POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS      239 

me)  that  the  demands  of  the  Postal  employees  reached 
a  depth,  or  abyss,  which  no  plummet  would  fathom. 
Sir  William  ^^   ^"^^   now    that   they   claim   the 

Harcourt  on  Post  Postal  surplus,  which  amounts  to  nearly 
omce Employees  f^^^  millions  [sterling] ...  .There  are 
192,000  of  them,  and  of  these  probably  100,000  have 
votes.  Adding  these  to  the  dockyard,  arsenal,  and 
stores  factory  hands,  and  other  Government  employees, 
we  have  a  political  force  that  may  turn  the  scale  at  a 
General  Election.  Candidates  are  tempted  to  bid 
against  one  another  with  the  taxpayer's  money.  *Let 
us  be  charitable !'  said  Sydney  Smith,  and  put  his  hand 
into  a  bystander's  pocket.  Our  legislators  were  proof 
against  the  hectoring  of  the  Tudors,  the  violence  of  the 
Stuarts,  and  the  blandishments  of  the  Georges ;  surely 
they  will  never  yield  to  the  menaces  of  demagogues." 
"At  this  point  I  would  like  to  state  briefly  my  own 

experience Last  year  great  pressure  was  brought 

to  bear  in  the  House  of  Commons  on  Members  of  Par- 
liament, and,  with  thirty  other  Members,  I  was  threat- 

Thirty  M.  P.'s  ^^^^  ^^^^  ^°^^  ^^  "^^  ^^^*  unless  I  voted 
threatened  with  to  meet  the  demands  of  the  Postal  serv- 
Loss  of  Seat  ^^^^  j^  ^^^  further  intimated  to  me 
that  the  Postal  servants'  vote,  100,000  strong,  would 
turn  out  any  Government.  A  few  minutes  afterwards 
it  fell  to  my  lot  to  address  the  House  on  the  question 

of  increase  of  postmen's  wages I  ended  my  speech 

by  declaring  that  civil  servants  who  threatened  Mem- 
bers of  Parliament  for  refusing  to  vote  them  increased 


240  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

salaries  ought  to  be  disfranchised.  Result — a  meet- 
ing called  in  my  constituency,  my  opponent  placed  in 
the  chair,  and  a  vote  of  censure  passed  on  me.  The 
London  postmen  came  to  Canterbury  and  addressed 
my  constituents  at  the  meeting.  It  is  not  surprising, 
therefore,  that  at  the  recent  election  my  agents  in- 
formed me  that  46  postmen  voted  solid  against  me.^ 
I  do  not  blame  the  postmen ;  they  were  perfectly  justi- 
fied in  using  their  power;  but  if  I  had  not  had  at  my 
back  one  of  the  most  intelligent  bodies  of  electors  in 
the  United  Kingdom,  I  should  have  been  defeated 
through  the  postmen's  action. 

"It  was  some  consolation  to  me  to  receive  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  after  my  speech,  hearty,  though 
private,  congratulations  from  hard-working,  earnest 
workingmen  representatives,  who  expressed  their  en- 
tire approval  of  what  they  were  pleased  to  call  my 
courage.  But  something  ought  to  be  done  to  prevent 
a  recurrence  of  such  a  scandal." 

In  view  of  Mr.  Heaton's  closing  remarks,  it  is  in- 
teresting to  note  that  four  of  the  eight^  Labor  Members 
voted,  and  that  all  of  them  favored  the  appointment  of 
a  House  of  Commons  Select  Committee. 

In  the  campaign  preceding  the  General  Election  of 
January,  1906,  the  several  associations  of  Postal  and 

*At  the  election  of  1906  Mr.  Heaton  received  2,210  votes,  while 
his  opponent  received   1,262. 

'^The  House  of  Commons  Poll  Book,  1885-1906,  issued  by  The 
Liberal  Publication  Department. 


COMMITTEE  ON  POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS      241 

Telegraph  employees  addressed  letters  to  the  candi- 
dates for  Parliament,  asking  those  candidates  whether 

they  would  "support  the  claims  of  the 
Post  OMce  Em-   ^        ,          .    ^  ,  . 

ployees  and  the    Postal   and  Telegraph   employees   and 

General  Election  vote  for  the  appointment  of  a  Select 
of  190  Committee  of  the  House  of  Commons 

for  the  purpose  of  inquiring  into  their  conditions  of  pay 
and  service ;  and  stating  that  on  their  part  the  workers 
pledged  themselves  to  accept  as  final  the  decision  of 
such  a  tribunal."  At  the  annual  conference  of  the 
Postal  Telegraph  Clerks'  Association,  held  in  March, 
1906,  the  President  of  the  Association  said  that  nearly 
450  of  the  670  Members  of  the  House  of  Commons* 
had  pledged  themselves  to  support  a  motion  for  a  Par- 
liamentary Inquiry  into  the  position  of  the  Post  Office 
employees.^ 

In  the  third  sitting  of  the  new  Parliament,  held  on 
February  20,  the  Postmaster  General,  Mr.  Sydney 
Buxton,  announced  that  the  Government  had  decided 
to  appoint  a  Select  Committee  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons.^ And  on  March  6,  the  Postmaster  General  in- 
troduced a  motion  for  a  Committee  of  seven  to  be  nomi- 
nated by  the  Committee  of  Selection.  In  response  to 
the  wishes  of  the  House,  the  Postmaster  General  sub- 
sequently changed  his  motion  to  one  calling  for  a  Com- 


*  Composition  of  the  House :  Liberal  and  Labor  Members,  428 ; 
Conservatives,  130;  Liberal  Unionists,  28;  and  Nationalists,  80. 
'The  Times,  March  17,  1906. 
^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates. 
16 


242  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

mittee  of  nine,  to  be  appointed  by  the  whips  of  the 
several  parties  in  the  House.^ 

The  motion  was  carried  without  debate  upon  the 
question  whether  a  Committee  should  be  appointed.  In 
the  course  of  the  debate  whether  the  Committee  should 
be  appointed  by  the  Committee  of  Selection,  or  by  the 
Party  Whips,  Lord  Balcarres,  who  had  been  a  Junior 
Lord  of  the  Treasury  in  the  Balfour  Government,  used 
these  words :  "As  regards  those  Honorable  Gentlemen 
who  had  entered  Parliament  for  the  first  time,^  he 
thought  he  was  fairly  accurate  when  he  said  that  they 
had  given  pretty  specific  pledges  upon  the  matter  [of 
the  appointment  of  a  Select  Committee]  to  those  who 
had  sent  them  to  the  House."  Sir  A.  Acland-Hood, 
who  had  been  Chief  Whip  and  Patronage  Secretary  to 
the  Treasury  in  the  late  Balfour  Government,  said: 
"There  was  a  debate  and  a  division  [upon  this  ques- 
tion, last  year,]  and  nearly  the  whole  of  the  support- 
ers of  the  Government  voted  against  the  appointment 
of  the  Committee.  No  doubt  many  of  them  suffered 
for  it  at  the  General  Election;  they  either  lost  their 
seats  or  had  their  majorities  reduced  in  consequence 
of  the  vote."  And,  finally,  Sir  Henry  Campbell-Ban- 
nerman,  the  new  Prime  Minister,  expressed  himself 
as  follows  in  the  course  of  an  argument  in  favor  of  a 
Committee  appointed  by  the  Committee  of  Selection 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  6,  1906,  p.  323  and 
following. 

'281  in  number. 


COMMITTEE  ON  POST  OFFICE  SERVANTS      243 

rather  than  by  the  House  itself  through  the  agency  of 
the  Party  Whips.  The  Prime  Minister  said:  ^'There 
was  a  great  deal  of  force  in  what  the  Right  Honorable 
Gentleman  [Sir  A.  Acland-Hood]  had  said  as  to  the 
fears  that  were  entertained  in  many  quarters  of  the 
The  Prim  effect  on  the  Committee  if  appointed 

Minister  on  under  pressure  and  insistence,  and  the 

Election  Pledges  retroactive  effect  of  old  promises  ex- 
tracted in  moments  of  agony  from  candidates  at  the 
General  Election."^ 

The  Select  Committee  on  Post  Office  Servants  con- 
sists of:  4  Liberals,  Messrs.  Barker,  Edwards,  Hob- 
house  and  Sutherland ;  2  Conservatives,  the  Honorable 
Claude  Hay  and  Sir  Clement  Hill ;  2  Liberal  and  Labor 
Members,  Messrs.  John  Ward  and  G.  J.  Wardle;  and 
I  Nationalist,  Mr.  P.  A.  Meechan.^ 

The  reference  to  the  Committee  is :  "to  inquire  into 
the  wages  and  position  of  the  principal  classes  of  Post 
Office  servants,  and  also  of  the  unestablished  postmas- 
ters. To  examine,  so  far  as  may  be  necessary  for  the 
purpose  of  their  Report,  the  conditions  of  employment 
of  these  classes.  To  report,  whether,  having  regard 
to  the  conditions  and  prospects  of  their  employment, 
and,  as  far  as  may  be,  to  the  standard  rate  of  wages 
and  the  position  of  other  classes  of  workers,  the  re- 
muneration they  receive  is  adequate  or  otherwise." 

In  the  spring  of  1907,  the  Committee  reported  that  it 


^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  6,  1906. 
^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  9,  1906,  p.  847. 


244:  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

had  not  had  time  to  perform  its  task,  and  asked  for 
reappointment.  The  evidence  thus  far  taken  by  the 
Committee  had  not  been  published  at  the  date  of  this 
writing,  March  20,  1907. 

Lord  Stanley  was  one  of  the  many  Conservative  can- 
didates defeated  in  the  General  Election  of  January, 
Lord  Stanlev  1906.  When  his  defeat  became  known, 
Congratulated  hundreds  of  telegrams  were  showered 
upon  him  by  postal  and  telegraph  employees  located  in 
all  parts  of  the  United  Kingdom.  The  telegram  sent 
by  Liverpool  postal  and  telegraph  employees  was  typi- 
cal of  the  lot.  It  congratulated  Lord  Stanley  upon  his 
retirement  to  private  life,  and  assured  him  that  the 
senders  at  all  times  would  do  all  in  their  power  to  make 
the  retirement  a  permanent  one. 


I 


CHAPTER  XIV 

THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS,  UNDER  PRESSURE  FROM 
THE    CIVIL   SERVICE    UNIONS,    CURTAILS   THE 
EXECUTIVE'S  POWER  TO  DISMISS  INCOM- 
PETENT AND   REDUNDANT  EMPLOYEES 

The  old  practice  of  intervention  by  Members  of  Parliament 
on  behalf  of  individual  civil  servants  with  political  influence  has 
given  way  to  the  new  practice  of  intervention  on  behalf  of  the 
individual  civil  servant  because  he  is  a  member  of  a  civil  service 
union.  The  new  practice  is  the  more  insidious  and  dangerous 
one,  for  it  means  class  bribery.  The  doctrine  that  entrance  upon 
the  State's  service  means  "something  very  nearly  approaching 
to  a  freehold  provision  for  life."  Official  testimony  of  various 
prominent  civil  servants,  especially  of  Mr.  (now  Lord)  Welby, 
Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Treasury  from  1885  to  1894;  and 
Mr.  T.  H.  Farrer,  Permanent  Secretary  to  Board  of  Trade  from 
1867  to  1886.  The  costly  practice  of  giving  pensions  no  solution 
of  the  problem  of  getting  rid  of  unsatisfactory  public  servants. 
The  difficulty  of  dismissing  incompetent  persons  extends  even 
to  probationers.  The  cost  of  "reorganizing"  incompetent  persons 
out  of  the  public  service. 

The  intervention  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  the 
details  of  the  administration  of  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment and  the  other  State  Departments,  is  by  no  means 
confined  to  the  raising  of  salaries  and  wages.  It  ex- 
tends to  practically  every  kind  of  question  that  arises 
out  of  the  conflicts  of  the  interests  of  the  State  servants 

245 


246  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

and  the  interests  of  the  pubHc  Treasury.  The  inter- 
vention is  due  to  the  organized  action  of  the  "civil  serv- 
ice unions;"  and  it  is  exercised  primarily  on  behalf  of 
classes  of  employees,  but  not  exclusively.  The  latter 
day  spirit  of  the  civil  service  unions  is  to  make  the 
cause  of  the  individual  the  cause  of  the  class,  and  that 
brings  about  much  intervention  through  the  House  of 
Commons,  by  the  organized  civil  service,  on  behalf  of 
individual  State  servants.  The  ancient  form  of  inter- 
vention on  behalf  of  the  individual  who  had  claims 
that  were  based  on  personal  influence  or  family  influ- 
ence, on  family  ties,  or  on  friendship,  has  been  abolished. 

Personal  Bribery  ^^  ^^^  P^^^^  ^^^  ^^^^  developed  inter- 
replaced  by  vention   on   behalf   of   the  individual, 

Class  Bribery  prompted  by  the  fact  that  the  individual 
in  question  is  a  member  of  a  civil  service  union  that 
seeks  to  enforce  certain  ideals  as  to  the  terms  and  con- 
ditions that  shall  prevail  in  the  public  service.  Of  the 
two  forms  of  intervention,  the  latter  is  the  more  per- 
nicious and  demoralizing,  partly  because  it  is — or  will 
become — more  pervasive,  partly  because  it  rests  on 
class  bribery  and  class  corruption,  as  distinguished 
from  the  individual  bribery  and  the  individual  corrup- 
tion upon  which  rested  the  old  form  of  intervention. 
Of  those  two  forms  of  corruption,  the  bribery  of  classes 
is  the  more  difficult  to  eradicate. 

One  of  the  most  important  results  of  this  interven- 
tion on  behalf  of  individuals  has  been  the  establish- 
ment of  the  doctrine  that  once  a  man  has  landed  in  the 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER      247 

employ  of  the  State,  he  has  "something  very  nearly 
approaching  to  a  freehold  of  provision  for  life/'  to 
State  Employ-  ^^P^^^  ^^^  ^ords  of  the  Chairman  of 
ment  means  Life  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Civil 
Employment         Services  Expenditure,  1873.^ 

Before  that  committee,  Sir  Wm.  H.  Stephenson, 
Chairman  of  the  Inland  Revenue  Commissioners,  said : 
"  ....  if  a  man  was  reported  to  be  hopelessly  in- 
efficient, I  should  dismiss  him;  but  even  then  you 
must  act  v^ith  a  great  deal  of  forbearance.  For  the 
simple  reason  that  you  are  amenable  to  many  opinions 
beside  your  own.  You  cannot  act  absolutely  upon 
your  own  judgment  without  being  liable  to  be  com- 
pelled to  give  your  reasons  for  that  judgment;  and 
these  reasons,  though  perfectly  clear  in  your  own  mind, 
may  not  always  be  easy  to  give  to  the  satisfaction  of 

another  man I  am  afraid  we  should  have  a 

very  bad  time  of  it  out  of  doors  if  we  exercised  a  little 
more  freedom  in  dismissing  incompetent  clerks  and 
promoting  deserving  ones ;  I  judge  very  much  by  what 
I  see;  as  it  is,  there  is  a  great  disposition,  I  think,  to 
exclaim  against  anything  like  an  act  of  tyranny,  and 
the  exercise  of  such  freedom  would  be  called  tyranny. 
....  I  have  no  doubt  that  if  a  public  department  had 
the  power  of  absolute  dismissal,  it  would  have  a  con- 
siderable effect  in  increasing  efficiency;  but  what  I  say 
is,  that  you  cannot  give  them  that  power  in  the  same 

*  Third  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Ex- 
penditure, 1873  '>  q-  4,283  to  4,288. 


248  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

way  that  it  is  held  by  a  man  in  private  employment. 
You  have  too  many  critics ;  you  have  the  public  news- 
paper press ;  you  have  Members  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons who  are  personally  interested  in  these  people; 
and  you  would  be  surprised,  I  am  sure,  if  you  knew  the 
numerous  instances  in  which,  for  the  smallest  thing 
[inflictions  of  punishment],  applications  are  made, 
pressing  that  this  man  is  an  excellent  man,  a  good 
brother,  a  kind  father,  and  all  that  kind  of  thing  which 
influences  men  individually,  but  which  cannot  [does, 
but  should  not]  influence  the  judgment  of  the  heads 
of  a  public  office.'*  Sir  William  H.  Stephenson  was 
asked :  "Do  you  not  think  that  it  might  be  made  a  rule 
in  your  office,  as  in  the  Customs,  that  any  interference 
through  a  Member  of  Parliament  should  lead  to  dis- 
missal ?"  He  replied :  "Yes ;  but  you  must  prove  that 
a  man  knows  it.  You  cannot  dismiss  a  man  if  some 
injudicious  friend  takes  up  his  case;  and  if  a  man  has 
a  friend,  it  is  always  an  injudicious  one  under  these 
circumstances."^ 

Before  this  same  committee  of  1873,  ^^-  Stanfeld, 
M.  P.,  Third  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  who,  in  1869  to 
1 87 1  had  been  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury, 
said:  ....  "the  great  difference  between  the  public 
establishment  and  the  private  establishment  is  this: 
that  practically  speaking,  in  a  public  establishment, 
you  have  a  large  proportion  of  established  clerks  who 

'  Third  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Ex- 
penditure, 1873;  q.  4,270  to  4,282,  4,146  and  following,  and  4,198 
to  4,210. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       249 

can  do  no  more  than  a  moderate  amount  of  service. 
....  Eecaiise  you  have  not  the  faculty  which  men  in 
private  business  have,  without  any  particular  fault,  of 
saying  to  a  man :  'On  the  whole,  you  do  not  suit  me, 
and  I  mean  to  get  somebody  else/  When  you  get  a 
clerk  on  a  public  establishment,  he  remains  on  that 
establishment  with  very  rare  exceptions,  and  you  have 
to  make  the  best  of  your  bargain;  the  result  naturally 
is  that,  with  the  exception  of  men  of  ability  and  energy, 
you  have  not  so  much  stimulus  for  their  effort  as  you 
have  in  private  employment,  and  you  have  not  by  any 
means  the  same  power  of  dealing  with  them."  .  .  .  .^ 
In  1888,  before  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to 
inquire  into  the  Civil  Establishments,  this  question  of 
the  great  difficulty  of  getting  rid  of  incompetent  or 
undesirable  men,  was  threshed  out  at  great  length. 
Sir  Charles  DuCane,  Chairman  of  the  Commissioners 
of  Customs,  said:  "But  it  is  an  invidious  thing,  I  do 
not  mean  to  say  as  regards  myself,  but  invidious 
rather  as  regards  the  [political]  head  of  a  department 
[the  Minister],  to  come  and  make  complaints  against 
men  whom  one  cannot  perhaps  accuse  of  any  overt  act 
of  negligence  or  carelessness,  but  who  are  merely  rather 

below  the  level  of  ordinary  efficiency I  think 

it  would  be  a  most  desirable  thing  that  we  should  have 
the  power  of  getting  rid  of  incapable  and  inefficient 
men  who  have  yet  managed  to  keep  themselves  out  of 

*  Third  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Ex- 
penditure, 1873;  Q.  4.937. 


250  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

any  positive  scrape  or  offence,  for  which  they  would 
be  charged  before  a  Member  of  the  Board  of  Com- 
missioners of  Customs."* 

To  Sir  S.  A.  Blackwood,  Secretary  to  the  Post 
Office  since  1880,  the  Chairman  of  the  Royal  Com- 
mission put  the  question:  *'Do  you  think  it  is  a  real 
evil  in  the  public  service  that  there  should  not  be  the 
same  power  to  remove  inefficient  men  as  exists  outside 
the  public  service,  of  course  I  mean  within  certain 
limits,  because  the  public  service  must  be  different  from 
private  service,  but  in  your  experience,  have  you  found 
it  to  be  a  real  evil  in  the  way  of  efficiency  as  well  as  of 
wise  economy  to  be  obliged  to  keep  men  whom  you 
would  be  glad  to  get  rid  of  if  you  could  have  sent  them 
away  with  something  in  their  pocket,  [i  e.,  a  pen- 
sion] ?"  The  answer  was :  "Yes,  it  is  a  serious  objec- 
tion." Sir  S.  A.  Blackwood  even  asserted  that  the  Act 
of  1887,  giving  the  Treasury  discretionary  power  to 
pension  men  unable  to  discharge  efficiently  the  duties  of 
their  office,^  would  not  help  much.  "We  should  always 
be  asking  an  officer  to  relinquish  his  full  pay,  and  to  re- 
tire upon  a  lesser  pension  than  he  would  be  entitled  to  if 
he  served  his  full  time,  and  there  is  always  a  disinclina- 

^  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.  17,559,  i7>572,  and  17,564. 

^The  Act  of  1887  reads:  "Where  a  civil  servant  is  removed 
from  office  on  the  ground  of  his  inability  to  discharge  efficiently  the 
duties  of  his  office,  and  a  superannuation  allowance  cannot  lawfully 
be  granted  to  him  under  the  Superannuation  Acts  of  1834  and  1859, 
and  the  Treasury  thinks  that  the  special  circumstances  of  the  case 
justify  the  grant  to  him  of  a  retiring  allowance,  they  may  grant  to 
him  such  retiring  allowance  as  they  think  just  and  proper."  .  .  . 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER      251 

tion  on  the  part  of  heads  of  departments  to  do  that."^ 
Sir  Reginald  E.  Welby,  who  had  entered  the  Treas- 
ury service  in  1856,  and  had  been  made  Permanent 
Secretary  in  1885,  said  there  was  full  power  to  dis- 
miss idle  or  incompetent  persons  without  granting 
pensions  or  allowances  of  any  sort.  Thereupon,  Mr. 
F.  Mitford,  one  of  the  Members  of  the  Royal  Com- 
mission, asked:  *Ts  not  really  the  sole  difficulty  that 
public  departments  have  to  contend  with  in  exercising 
that  full  power,  the  fact  that  Parliament  is  behind 
them,  and  a  Member  of  Parliament  always  asks  ques- 
tions [in  the  House]  and  brings  interest  [pressure]  to 
bear  upon  the  head  of  the  department,  which  practically 
annuls  that  power?  The  difficulty  lies  not  with  the 
public  officer,  but  practically  with  the  difficulties  that 
are  thrown  in  his  way  outside  his  department  by  in- 
dividual Members  of  Parliament?"  The  Permanent 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  answered :  "There  is  always 
before  the  heads  of  departments  the  fact  that  pressure 
may  be  brought  to  bear  by  Members  of  Parliament, 
and  it  requires,  therefore,  that  a  case  must  be  very 
strong,  that  it  must  be  a  very  good  case  before  you 
would  dismiss.  Probably  you  would  be  much  more 
long-suffering  in  a  Government  department,  than  you 
would  be  in  a  private  establishment."  Sir  Reginald 
Welby  just  previously  had  said:  "I  have  known  men 
dismissed  from  the  Treasury Perhaps  I  had 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.  17,774  to  17,776,  and  17,942a. 


252  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

better  say,  I  have  heard  of  men  being  dismissed  from 
the  Treasury  for  simple  idleness,  but  it  was  before  my 
time."  Thereupon  the  Chairman  had  queried:  "It  is 
the  fact,  speaking  generally,  is  it  not,  that  mere  idle- 
ness and  mere  incompetence,  without  very  gross 
negligence  of  duty  or  gross  misbehavior,  does  not 
bring  about  dismissal  from  the  service,  either  in  the 
Treasury  or  anywhere  else  that  you  are  aware  of?" 
The  reply  was :  "I  would  rather  put  it  in  this  way :  I 
think  that  Government  offices  are  very  long-suffering 
in  that  matter.  If  the  man  was  reported  as  distinctly 
very  idle  and  not  doing  his  work  he  would  be  warned, 
and  I  think  if  it  was  repeated  after  that  (I  am  speaking 
of  any  fairly  managed  Government  department),  he 
would  be  dismissed.  But  I  think  that  a  Government 
department  is,  for  one  reason  or  another,  more  long- 
suffering  than  a  private  establishment  would  be 

While  I  am  admitting  the  possibility  of  there  being 
bad  officers,  I  should  like  to  add  that  both  in  the  Upper 
and  Lower  Division  Clerks,  we  have  got,  on  the 
whole,  a  very  satisfactory  set  of  men  under  the  present 
regulations  of  the  Treasury,  and  that  they  do  their 
work  well.  I  am  happy  to  say  that  very  few  cases  of 
complaint  come  before  me." 

Xh    H  f  ^^'  L^wson,  a  member  of  the  Royal 

Commons  is  Commission,  asked  Sir  Reginald  Wel- 
Master  by:  "But  you  would  hardly  plead  the 

interference  of  Members  of  Parliament  as  a  justifica- 
tion for  not  getting  rid  of  an  unworthy  servant,  would 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       253 

you  ?"  Sir  Reginald  Welby  replied :  "It  is  not  a  good 
reason,  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  it  is  powerful.  The 
House  of  Commons  are  our  masters."^ 

Sir  T.  H.  Farrer,  who  had  been  Permanent  Secre- 
tary of  the  Board  of  Trade  from  1867  to  1886,  and  had 
been  a  Member  of  the  so-called  Playfair  Commission, 
of  1876,  on  the  Civil  Service,  was  asked  by  Mr.  R.  W. 
Hanbury,  a  Member  of  the  Royal  Commission  of 
1888,  whether  the  failure  to  dismiss  incompetent  men 
could  not  be  attributed  to  "soft  heartedness"  on  the 
part  of  heads  of  departments?  Sir  T.  H.  Farrer  re- 
plied :  "Yes,  that  is  another  aspect  of  the  case,  and  it 
is  no  doubt  theoretically  perfectly  true;  but  I  think  it 
overlooks  what  is  the  real  difficulty  of  getting  rid  of 
useless  men.  There  is  a  certain  difficulty  in  the  soft 
heartedness  of  heads  of  departments  and  of  Ministers. 
But  there  is  a  very  much  greater  difficulty  in  the  pres- 
sure which  is  put  upon  them  by  Members  of  the  House 
of  Commons.  That  is  the  real  difficulty;  the  real  dif- 
ficulty of  the  public  service  is  getting  rid  of  bad  men; 
and  the  real  difficulty  of  getting  rid  of  bad  men  is  that 
no  Minister  will  face  the  pressure  which  is  put  upon 

him  from  outside I  have  had  much  personal 

experience  of  the  matter;  I  have  been  plagued  all  my 
life  at  the  Board  of  Trade  with  inefficient  men  that  I 
wanted  to  get  rid  of,  but  have  been  unable  to  do  so. 
....  Parliamentary  pressure  is  the  main  difficulty. 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.  10,532  to  10,544. 


254  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

....  Members  are  economical  in  general  [protesta- 
tions] ;  but  in  particular  cases  they  think  more  of 
their  constituents  than  of  the  public  service.  No 
doubt  with  a  little  thinking  I  could  recall  a  very  great 
number  of  instances,  but  two  or  three  occur  to  me. 
Not  very  many  years  ago  there  was  a  clerk  of  whom 
perpetual  complaints  were  made  to  me.  He  was  in  a 
hard-worked  department,  and  the  heads  of  it  told  me 
repeatedly:  *We  can  do  nothing  with  him.'  At  last 
we  got  it  arranged  that  he  should  go  [with  a  large 
pension,  on  the  theory  that  his  office  was  abolished,  be- 
cause no  longer  required].  My  back  was  turned — 
I  was  away  on  a  holiday — and  when  I  came  back,  I 
found  that  Parliamentary  pressure,  by  which  I  mean 
applications  from  Members,  had  been  put  on,  and  in 
spite  of  us  all,  the  man  was  back  in  the  place  to  the 
detriment  of  our  credit.  Let  me  mention  another 
case.  I  was  engaged  upon  a  reorganization  of  the 
department  under  one  of  the  strongest  men  [Ministers] 
I  have  ever  served.  What  the  President  of  the  Board 
of  Trade  said  to  me,  in  effect  was :  *We  must  have  new 
blood;  we  are  getting  crowded  up  with  effete  men;  I 
You  may  dismtss  will  back  you  in  anything  you  do,  only 
but  you  must  not  you  must  undertake  not  to  get  me  into 
a  difficulty  in  the  House  of  Commons.  I  cannot  afford 
it ;  the  Government  cannot  afford  time  for  it ;  they  can- 
not afford  strength  to  fight  battles  of  that  kind.*  We 
set  to  work  about  the  reorganization  with  our  hands 
tied,  and  we  were  obliged  to  say  to  these  men :  *WelI, 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       255 

if  you  stay  here,  we  will  make  it  very  uncomfortable 
for  you;  we  will  put  you  in  the  very  worst  places  in 
the  office/  The  Treasury  offered  good  terms  of  re- 
tirement   [pensions],  and  in  that  way,  after  a  good 

deal  of  fighting,  we  got  rid  of  most  of  them 

We  had  to  give  them  very  high  terms  [that  is,  very 
liberal  pensions].  I  may  mention  a  case  which  hap- 
pened even  since  then.  I  refer  to  the  official  Receivers 
in  Bankruptcy.  They  were  men  who  were  appointed 
only  a  few  years  ago,  under  the  most  stringent  condi- 
tions imposed  by  the  Treasury  and  the  Eoard  of  Trade, 
and  without  the  slightest  reference  to  personal  con- 
siderations or  to  politics.  They  were  told  that  they 
were  appointed  on  trial,  that  they  might  be  removed  at 
any  moment  if  the  Board  of  Trade  desired  it  for  the 
good  of  the  service.  Fortunately,  most  of  them  have 
turned  out  extremely  well.  One,  perhaps  more,  turned 
out  bad,  but  one  certainly  turned  out  very  bad.  Per- 
petual complaints  were  made  to  me  by  the  head  of  that 
department  that  he  could  do  nothing  with  this  man, 
and  that  the  business  was  being  badly  conducted. 
After  a  good  deal  of  trouble,  after  I  left,  it  was  deter- 
mined to  remove  this  man.  The  Members  of  Parlia- 
ment for  the  county,  as  I  am  told,  came  and  put  pres- 
sure upon  the  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade  [the 
Minister] ,  till  he  was  obliged  to  say :  *I  cannot  remove 
him ;  he  must  stay.'  " 

To  the  foregoing  testimony  from  the  Permanent 
Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  the  Chairman  of  the 


256  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Royal  Commission  replied:  "I  gather  from  what  you 
say,  that,  supposing  it  was  possible,  under  this  new 
system  of  pensions  and  allowances,  to  give  a  man  who 
Pension  System  was  sent  away  from  the  service  the 
no  Remedy  money  which  he  had  himself  contrib- 

uted toward  his  ultimate  pension,  either  with  or  with- 
out the  addition  of  a  Government  grant,  you  do  not 
think  that  would  get  over  the  difficulty  in  getting  rid 
of  incompetent  men?"  Sir  T.  H.  Farrer  replied: 
"No,  I  do  not  think  it  would,  unless  the  House  of 
Commons  passes  a  self-denying  ordinance,  and  refuses 
to  interfere  with  the  Ministers  in  the  management  of 
their  departments."^ 

Later  in  the  examination,  Lord  Lingen,  who  had 
been  Permanent  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  from  1869 
to  1885,  said  to  Sir  T.  H.  Farrer:  "You  have  given  a 
good  deal  of  evidence  as  to  the  difficulties  which  the 
relation  of  the  public  departments  to  Parliament  creates. 
I  think  we  might  hold  there  is  nothing  in  private 
service  analogous  to  what  you  may  call  the  triennial 
change  of  Government,  that  [when]  everybody  who 
has  been  passed  over  [not  promoted],  who  thinks  he 
has  any  grievance,  considers  that  he  has  a  fresh  chance 
on  a  change  of  Ministry?"  The  Secretary  of  the 
Board  of  Trade  replied:  "Yes,  I  remember  distinctly 
one  particular  case  in  which  on  every  change  of  Gov- 
ernment a  fresh  appeal  was  made  to  the  new  Ministers 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.  19,980,  20,011  to  20,020,  and 
20,082. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       257 

on  behalf  of  men  who  had  been  retired  for  good  rea- 
sons." Lord  Lingen  continued :  "It  revived  questions 
which  had  been  supposed  to  be  settled?"  "Yes,  it 
does,  not  infrequently." 

On  August  I,  1890,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  the 
Postmaster  General,  Mr.  Raikes,  in  speaking  of  a 
Post  Office  employee  who  had  been  disciplined,  said: 
"The  case  is  one  to  which  I  have  given  a  great  deal  of 
personal  attention;  indeed,  I  may  say  that  in  cases  of 
dismissal  or  punishment  I  have  always  endeavored  to 
satisfy  myself  thoroughly  as  to  the  facts,  and  to 
mitigate,  if  I  can,  the  effect  of  the  regulations  of  the 
Department."  On  that  same  day  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral stated — in  reply  to  Mr.  Conybeare,^  who  was  inter- 
vening on  behalf  of  one  Cornwell,  dismissed  from  the 
postal  service — that  Cornwell  had  been  dismissed  for 
the  second  time.  After  the  first  dismissal,  the  Post- 
master General  himself  had  reinstated  Cornwell.  The 
second  dismissal  had  been  necessary  "in  the  interest  of 
the  Service  at  large,  but  especially  in  that  of  the  other 
men  employed  on  the  same  duty,  his  case  should  be 
dealt  with  in  an  exemplary  manner."^ 

In  March,  1896,  the  Chairman  of  the  Inter-Depart- 
mental Committee  on  Post  Office  Establishments, 
asked  Mr.   Lewin  Hill,   Assistant   Secretary   General 


^  Who's  Who,  1905,  Conybeare,  C.  A.  V.,  M.  P.,  N.  W.  Div.  of 
Cornwall,  1885  to  1895  ;  Member  London  School  Board,  1888  to 
1890;  Education:  Christ  Church,  Oxford;  Publications:  Treatise  on 
the  Corrupt  and  Illegal  Practices  Acts,  1892. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  i,   1890,  p.   1,647. 
17 


258  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Post  Office :  "Do  you  think  there  is  any  other  particular 
class  of  employment  which  is  comparable  with  that  of 
the  postmen?"  Mr.  Hill  replied:  "I  thought  of  rail- 
way servants,  whose  work  in  many  ways  resembles 
the  work  of  our  employees.  If  they  have  not  the  same 
permanence  as  our  people  have,  they  have  continuous 
employment  so  long  as  they  are  efficient,  but  our  peo- 
ple have  continuous  employment  whether  they  are 
efficient  or  not."^  Several  months  later,  Mr.  Hill  tes- 
tified as  follows  before  this  same  Committee:  "Our 
inquiries  have  proved  that  the  telegraph  staff  at  Liver- 
pool is  excessive,  and  it  has  been  decided,  on  vacancies 
[occurring],  to  abolish  the  ten  appointments. "^  The 
meaning  of  this  statement  is,  that  if  a  mistake  is  made, 
and  too  many  men  are  appointed  to  a  certain  office ;  or, 
if  the  business  of  an  office  falls  off,  the  Government 
cannot  correct  the  redundancy  of  employees  by  dis- 
missing, or  by  transferring  to  some  other  office,  the 
redundant  employees.  It  must  wait  until  promotion, 
retirement  on  account  of  old  age,  or  death  shall  remove 
the  redundant  employees.  Before  this  same  committee, 
Mr.  J.  C.  Badcock,  Controller  London  Postal  Service, 
testified  that  in  theory  there  were  no  first  class  letter 
sorters  in  the  foreign  newspaper  department  of  the 
London  Post  Office,  since  there  had  been,  since  1886, 
no  work  that  called  for  first  class  newspaper  sorters. 

*  Report    of  the    Inter-Departmental    Committee    on    Post    Office 

Establishments,  1897;  q.  11,694. 

^Report    of  the   Inter-Departmental   Committee    on   Post    Office 

Establishments,  1897;  q.   15.166  to   15,171- 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       259 

But  as  a  matter  of  fact  there  were  thirty-seven  "redun- 
dant first  class  sorters,  who,  upon  resignation,  or  pen- 
sioning, or  death,  would  be  replaced  by  second  class 
sorters."^ 

In  1902,  Sir  Edgar  Vincent,^  a  Member  of  the 
Select  Committee  on  National  Expenditure,  1902, 
asked  Lord  Welby,  who  had  been  Permanent  Secre- 
tary to  the  Treasury  from  1885  to  1894:  "It  is,  I  pre- 
sume, extremely  difficult  for  the  Minister  at  the  head 
of  a  Department  to  dismiss,  or  place  on  the  retired  list 
incompetent  officers?"  Lord  Welby  replied:  "It  is 
very  difficult.  Of  course  there  are  different  degrees 
of  incompetency.  It  is  not  so  difficult  in  the  case  of 
a  notoriously  incompetent  officer,  but  there  are  many 
people,  as  the  honorable  Member  is  aware,  against 
whom  nothing  whatever  can  be  said,  who  are  still  the 
very  reverse  of  competent."  Sir  Edgar  Vincent  con- 
tinued :  "Can  you  suggest  any  means  of  substituting  for 
a  Minister  whom  it  is  almost  impossible  to  expect  to 
perform  the  duty,  some  authority  who  should  revise 
Establishments  and  exclude  the  bad  bargains  ?"  Lord 
Welby,  of  course,  replied  that  the  iremedy  suggested 
would  be  inconsistent  with  the  principles  of  parlia- 


*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  1,881  to  1,883;  and  q.  1,270,  Mr.  G.  E. 
Rably. 

''Who's  Who,  1904,  Vincent,  Sir  Edgar;  M.  P.  since  1899;  Presi- 
dent of  Council  of  Ottoman  Public  Debt,  1883  5  Financial  Adviser 
to  Egyptian  Government,  1883  to  1889;  Governor  of  Imperial  Otto- 
man Bank,  Constantinople,  1889  to  1897, 


260  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

mentary  government/  in  that  it  would  substitute  for 
the  Minister,  who  holds  office  at  the  pleasure  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  some  permanent  officer  or  officers 
appointed  by  the  Ministry. 

DiMcult  to  dis-  Oftentimes  the  difficulty  experienced 
miss  Proba-  in  dismissing  unsatisfactory  public 
Uoners  servants,  extends  even  to  persons  ap- 

pointed on  probation. 

In  April,  1875,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  in 
the  course  of  the  Financial  Statement,  said :  "We  now 
appoint  young  men  upon  probation,  and  the  under- 
standing of  that  probationary  employment  is  that  if 
the  person  is  found  after  six  months  or  a  year  to  be  un- 
fit, he  is  told  that  he  must  look  elsewhere.  This  is  a 
very  invidious  duty  for  the  head  of  an  office  to  per'- 
form,  and  it  is  very  often  not  performed."^ 

In  1888,  Mr.  Harvey,  a  Member  of  the  Royal  Com- 
mission on  the  Civil  Establishments,  said :  "The  tend- 
ency in  a  Government  office  is  for  the  man  to  regard 
his  probationary  period  as  practically  a  'nominis  umbra' 
[the  mere  shadow  of  a  name] ,  nothing  else."^ 

The  Chairman  of  the  Royal  Commission  of  1888 
asked  Sir  Reginald  Welby,  the  Permanent  Secretary 
to  the  Treasury :  "Is  there  anything  like  a  real  proba- 

^  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  National  Expenditure, 
1902 ;  q.  2,559  and  2,560. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  15,  1875,  p.  1,033. 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.  20,084. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       261 

tion  in  any  one  of  the  divisions  of  the  clerks  at  the 
Treasury,  so  that  you  can  find  out  [whether  they  are 
Hkely  to  prove  competent]  ?"  *'Yes,  I  think  so.  The 
principal  clerk  of  the  division  to  v^hich  the  probationer 
is  attached  makes  a  report  at  the  end  of  six  months; 
and  I  have  known  a  principal  clerk  to  make  a  doubtful 
report.  In  that  case,  if  I  remember  rightly,  the  term 
of  probation  was  extended."^ 

The  boys  employed  by  the  Post  Office  Department 
for  the  delivery  of  telegrams,  are,  in  a  way,  on  contin- 
uous probation.  If  they  serve  satisfactorily,  they  are, 
at  the  age  of  i6,  taken  in  training  for  the  position  of 
postmen.  In  1897,  ^^-  Lewin  Hill,  Assistant  Secre- 
tary General  Post  Office,  said : . . . .  "in  London,  in  the 
past,  the  weeding  out  of  messenger  boys  at  16  years 
has  not  been  carried  out  so  far,  I  think,  owing  to  the 
paternal  feelings  of  the  Department.  Every  effort 
seems  to  have  been  made  to  keep  in  the  service  anybody 
who  could  possibly  scrape  through.  But  the  country 
postmasters  were,  as  a  rule,  careful  to  weed  out  unsatis- 
factory lads."     He  continued : "We  could  have  got 

better  postmen  [in  London],  if  we  had  had  a  free 
hand."2 

In  1857  the  opposition  made  in  Parliament  to  the 
system  of  pensions,  led  to  the  appointment  of  a  Com- 

*  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.  10,535  to  10,536. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  11,619  and  11,697. 


262  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

mittee  to  inquire  into  the  operation  of  the  Superannua- 
tion Act,  1834.  That  Committee  stated  as  follows  the 
argument  "from  the  public  point  of  view"  in  favor  of 
pensions.  "Though  it  is  strictly  the  duty  of  heads  of 
departments  to  remove  from  the  public  service  all  those 
who  have  become  unfit  to  discharge  their  duties,  yet 
experience  shows  that  this  duty  cannot  be  enforced. 
It  is  felt  to  be  hard — and  even  unjust — and  inefficient 
men  are,  therefore,  retained  in  the  Service  to  the  detri- 
ment of  efficiency.  They,  therefore,  were  unhesitat- 
ingly of  opinion  that  the  public  interest  would  be  best 
consulted  by  maintaining  a  system  of  superannuation 
allowances."^ 

In  accordance  with  the  foregoing  recommendation 
Parliament,  in  1859,  enacted  that  the  Treasury  might 
give  "abolition  terms"  to  persons  whose  offices  should 
be  abolished  in  consequence  of  the  "reorganization"  of 
their  department,  or  branch  of  service.  Under  that 
Act,  inefficient  persons  who  are  "reorganized  out  of 
the  service"  are  given  "pro  rata"  pensions,  plus  an  al- 
lowance for  "abolition  of  their  office."  For  example, 
a  man  aged  50,  with  30  years  of  service,  who  would 
become  entitled  to  a  pension  at  the  age  of  60,  will  be 
retired  at  50  years,  with  a  pro  rata  pension  on  the  basis 
of  30  years'  service,  plus  an  allowance  of  7  or  10  years' 
service  for  abolition  of  his  office."^ 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888,  p.  xx. 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission   appointed  to  inquire 

into   the  Civil  Establishments,   1888;   q.   19,229,   Mr.   Robert  GiflFen, 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       263 

In  1873,  before  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Serv- 
ices Expenditure,  Sir  William  H.  Stephenson,  Chair- 
man of  the  Commissioners  of  Inland  Revenue,  illus- 
trated the  v^^orking  of  this  system  with  the  statement 
that  in  1873-74,  the  salaries  paid  in  the  Inland  Revenue 
Department  would  aggregate  $4,808,580.  An  addi- 
tional $683,160  would  be  required  for  pensions;  and  a 
further  $234,175  would  be  required  on  account  of  the 
Cost  of  Pensions  abolition  terms  given  to  men  who  had 
to  the  Incom-  been  reorganized  out  of  the  Inland 
petent  Revenue  Department.    Thus  the  "non- 

effective," or  non-revenue  producing,  charges  of  the 
department  were  equivalent  to  19  per  cent,  of  the  ef- 
fective, or  revenue  producing,  charges.^ 

In  1888  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments  reported  that  the  burden 
on  the  State  for  pensions  was  equivalent  to  12  per 
cent,  to  15  per  cent,  of  the  working  salaries,  and  that 
the  payment  of  the  abolition  terms  raised  the  percent- 
age in  question  to  20  per  cent,  of  the  working  salaries. 
Sir  Reginald  E.  Welby,  Secretary  to  the  Treasury, 
stated  before  the  Commission,  that  even  the  past  liberal 
expenditure  on  account  of  pro  rata  pensions  with  aboli- 
tion terms,  had  not  enabled  the  State  to  get  rid  of  "in- 
efficient and  incapable  men."  The  Chairman  of  the 
Royal   Commission   spoke  of  the  abolition   terms  as 

the  eminent  statistician  and  economist,  who  was  also  an  officer  in  the 
Board  of  Trade. 

^  Third  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Ex- 
penditure, 1873;  q.  4,225. 


264  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

amounting  "almost  to  a  scandal."  Sir  R.  E.  Welby 
and  Lord  Lingen,  a  former  Secretary  to  the  Treasury, 
contrasted  the  State's  system  of  pensions  with  the 
system  of  the  London  and  North  Western  Railway. 
The  Railway's  pension  system  was  maintained  out  of 
a  fund  raised  by  a  2.5  per  cent,  reduction  from  the 
salaries  of  the  employees,  and  a  2.5  per  cent,  contri- 
bution from  the  treasury  of  the  railway. 

Sir  R.  E  Welby,  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  and 
other  witnesses,  spoke  of  the  abolition  terms  often 
acting  as  a  premium  on  inefficiency.  Mr.  Robert 
Giffen,  the  eminent  statistician  and  political  economist, 
who  also  was  an  officer  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  said : 
"When  a  man  is  reorganized  out  of  the  service,  as  a 
rule  he  gets  so  many  years'  service  added  [to  his  ac- 
tual service],  that  is  to  say,  at  50  years,  if  he  has 
served  30  years,  he  may  have  7  or  10  years'  service 
added,  and  thus  get  two-thirds  of  his  salary  as  a  pen- 
sion; and  he  begins  to  get  his  pension  at  once,  instead 
of  waiting  until  he  is  60  years  of  age.  A  man  who 
thus  gets  a  pension  at  50  years,  really  gets  more  than 
double  what  he  would  get  if  he  waited  until  60  years 
of  age.  The  present  value  of  $100  a  year,  beginning 
at  once  at  the  age  of  50  years,  is  a  good  deal  more  than 
double  the  present  value  of  $100  a  year  to  be  paid  to  a 
man  when  he  reaches  60  years.  The  difference  in 
favor  of  the  man  who  is  reorganized  out  of  the  serv- 
ice, as  against  the  man  who  remains  until  he  is  60  years 
of  age,  is  simply  overwhelming  to  my  mind." 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       265 

Sir  Algernon  E.  West,  Chairman  of  the  Inland  Reve- 
nue Commissioners,  illustrated  the  working  of  the  prac- 
tice of  getting  rid  of  inefficient  men  by  reorganizing 
an  office,  by  citing  the  following  instance  of  "success- 
ful" reorganization.  Sir  Algernon  West  had  retired 
39  upper  division  clerks,  permanently  reducing  the 
number  of  the  staff  by  39.  He  had  thus  effected  a 
saving  in  salaries  of  $70,000  a  year.  But  he  had 
incurred  an  annual  expenditure  of  $44,160  on  ac- 
count of  pensions,  and  an  annual  expenditure  of 
$10,000  on  account  of  abolition  terms.  Therefore  his 
net  saving  was  not  $70,000  but  only  $15,840.  Yet 
Sir  Algernon  West  denominated  his  reorganization 
successful. 

In  the  course  of  this  reorganization.  Sir  Algernon 
West  had  increased  the  hours  of  work  from  6  hours 
to  7  hours.  The  reorganization,  also,  had  necessitated 
certain  promotions.  Sir  Algernon  had  made  it  a  con- 
dition of  promotion,  that  the  man  promoted  should 
consent  to  work  7  hours  a  day.  Men  not  promoted 
he  gave  $150  a  year  "as  a  personal  allowance  in  con- 
sideration of  the  extra  hour  they  were  called  to  serve." 
One  man,  aged  34  years,  declined  to  work  more  than 
6  hours  on  any  terms,  saying  that  the  Government  had 
made  a  contract  with  him  for  six  hours'  work  a  day. 
In  order  to  get  rid  of  this  man.  Sir  Algernon  West 
gave  him  a  pension  on  the  basis  of  10  years'  service. 
Legally,  of  course,  the  man  had  no  claim  to  any  pen- 
sion or  abolition  allowance  whatever,  for  he  was 

or  -^HC 

OF 


266  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

reality  dismissed  for  refusing  to  perform  the  duties 
demanded  of  him.^ 


^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888,  pp.  xx  and  xxv,  and  q.  19,240, 
20,434  and  20,435,  20,370,  20,392  to  20,395,  20,412,  20,434  to  20,438, 
20,441,  19,229  and  following,  17,245  and  following,  and  20,398  to 
20,404. 


CHAPTER  XV 

THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS,  UNDER  PRESSURE  FROM 
THE   CIVIL    SERVICE   UNIONS,    CURTAILS    THE 
EXECUTIVE'S    POWER   TO    PROMOTE   EM- 
PLOYEES   ACCORDING   TO    MERIT 

The  civil  service  unions  oppose  promotion  by  merit,  and  de- 
mand promotion  by  seniority.  Testimony  presented  before : 
Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Expenditure,  1873;  Select 
Committee  on  Post  Office,  1876;  Royal  Commission  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  from  statement  made  in 
House  of  Commons,  in  1887,  by  Mr.  Raikes,  Postmaster  General ; 
and  before  the  so-called  Tweedmouth  Committee,  1897.  ^^- 
stances  of  intervention  by  Members  of  House  of  Commons  on 
behalf  of  civil  servants  who  have  not  been  promoted,  or  are 
afraid  they  shall  not  be  promoted. 

In  the  matter  of  promotion,  also,  the  civil  servants' 
unions  compel  the  Members  of  Parliament  to  inter- 
vene, on  behalf  of  individual  employees,  in  the  details 
of  the  administration  of  the  several  Departments  of 
State.  The  organized  civil  service  is  not  content  that 
every  man  should  have  an  equal  chance  of  promotion, 
so  far  as  his  industry  and  capacity  shall  qualify  him 
for  advancement ;  it  evinces  a  marked  tendency  to  de- 
mand equal  promotion  in  fact,  that  is,  the  elimination 
of  the  effects  of  the  natural  inequality  among  men. 
The  House  of  Commons,  in  yielding  in  this  matter  to 

267 


268  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  pressure  from  the  organized  civil  -service,  is  tend- 
ing to  reduce  the  pubHc  service  to  a  dull  level  of  medi- 
ocrity, which  action  at  one  and  the  same  time  impairs 
the  efficiency  of  the  public  service  and  makes  the  service 
of  the  State  unattractive  to  able  and  ambitious  men. 

In  this  matter  of  promotion,  the  permanent  heads 
of  the  Departments  are  hampered  also  by  the  unbusi- 
nesslike attitude  toward  the  conduct  of  the  public  busi- 
ness that  characterizes  large  sections  of  the  newspaper 
press  as  well  the  great  mass  of  the  voters.  That  un- 
businesslike frame  of  mind,  in  turn,  is  the  outgrowth 
of  that  untrained  sympathy  which  makes  every  one 
tend  to  sympathize  with  the  individual,  whenever  the 
interest  of  the  individual  clashes  with  that  of  the  State. 
To  illustrate,  in  1873,  before  the  Select  Committee  on 
Civil  Services  Expenditure,  Sir  William  H.  Stephen- 
son, Chairman  of  the  Commissioners  of  Inland  Reve- 
nue, stated  that  in  his  Department  promotion  was  main- 
ly by  seniority  in  the  two  lowest  classes,  to  some  extent 
by  seniority  in  the  third  class,  but  beyond  that  entirely 
by  merit.  But  he  hastened  to  add :  "Indeed,  if  I  may 
judge  by  the  complaints  that  I  have  heard  out  of  doors, 
occasionally  in  the  newspaper  press,  and  elsewhere,  the 
system  of  promotion  by  merit  is  supposed  to  be  carried 
to  rather  an  excessive  extent  in  the  Inland  Revenue."^ 

In  1876,  before  the  Select  Committee  on  Post  Office, 
Mr.  Hobson,  Postmaster  at  Glasgow,  stated  that  he 

*  Third  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Ex- 
penditure, 1873;  q.  4,193  to  4,206,  and  4,267. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       269 

could  not  promote  his  telegraph  operators  according 
to  their  dexterity,  he  was  obliged  to  promote  according 
to  seniority.  Mr.  Gower,  a  member  of  the  Select 
The  Glasgow  Committee  queried :  "Therefore,  there 
Postmaster's  is  no  encouragement  whatever  to  su- 
"Mistake"  pgj-iQj.   dexterity?"     Mr.    Hobson   re- 

plied: "I  should  not  recommend  a  clerk  for  promo- 
tion. . .  .if  I  were  satisfied  that  he  was  not  doing  all 
he  could  to  improve  himself ....  and  was  only  an  in- 
different operator.  I  should  mention  that  in  submit- 
ting the  report,  and  recommend  him  to  be  passed  over." 
Mr.  Gower  continued :  "But  suppose  he  took  every  sort 
of  pains  to  improve  himself,  but  did  not  improve?" 
The  answer  came:  "I  would  then  recommend  him  to 
go  forward  {L  e,  for  promotion]."  Mr.  Gower  then 
asked :  "Have  you  any  power  to  exchange  a  clerk  who 
is  a  slow  operator  for  another  quicker  operator  in  a 
district  where  it  would  not  signify  ?"  The  Postmaster 
at  Glasgow  replied:  "None  whatever."^  The  reader 
will  recall  that  there  are  numerous  telegraph  stations 
in  Glasgow. 

In  April,  1877,  the  Postmaster  General,  Lord  John 
Manners,  replied  to  the  Report  of  the  Select  Committee 
of  1876,  in  a  letter  to  the  Lords  Commissioners  of  the 
Treasury.  He  concluded  the  letter  with  the  state- 
ment :  "In  conclusion,  I  beg  leave  to  say  that  it  is,  I 
think,  hardly  worth  while  to  attempt  to  contradict  the 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Post  Office  (Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  3,122  to  3,125. 


270  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

mistakes  as  to  promotion  into  which  the  postmaster  of 
Glasgow  was  accidentally  betrayed  in  giving  his  evi- 
dence before  the  Committee  of  last  Session,  and  to 
which  no  reference  is  made  in  their  Report."^ 

Before  the  same  Committee,  Mr.  Edward  Graves, 
Divisional  Engineer,  recommended  that  the  head  of 
the  Post  Office  establish  the  rule,  "that,  other  things 
being  equal  as  to  seniority  and  general  business  capac- 
ity, preference  for  promotion  shall  always  be  given  to 
the  telegraph  clerk  who  has  shown  himself  possessed 
of  technical  knowledge,  and  who  is  desirous  of  obtain- 
ing technical  information."^ 

Passing  over  a  period  of  28  years,  that  is,  from  the 
year  1876  to  the  year  1904,  we  find  Mr.  E.  Trenam, 
Controller  London  Central  Telegraph  Office,  testify- 
ing that  because  of  danger  that  in  the  immediate  future 
there  would  be  a  lack  of  telegraph  clerks  who  had  a 
knowledge  of  the  technics  of  telegraphy,  Mr.  W.  H. 
Preece,  Engineer-in-Chief,  had  caused  a  special  in- 
crease in  pay — $26  a  year — ^to  be  offered  to  men  who 
should  acquire  such  knowledge.  The  witness  added 
that  "unfortunately  many  of  the  men  who  have  [ac- 
quired] this  knowledge  are  comparative  juniors,  and 
we  are  compelled  to  put  them  to  work  which  those  re- 
ceiving higher  pay  are  incompetent  to  perform.     It 

^Correspondence  Relating  to  the  Post  OMce  Telegraph  Depart- 
ment: Letter  of  April  12,  1877,  Postmaster  General,  Lord  John 
Manners,  to  the  Lords  Commissioners  of  the  Treasury. 

'Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Post  OMce  {Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  1,259. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       271 

will  take  some  years  to  adjust  the  anomaly ....  [that 
is,  before  the  incompetent  men  receiving  higher  pay 
shall  have  been  pensioned  or  shall  have  died]."^ 

Before  the  Royal  Commission  of  1888,  appointed  to 
inquire  into  the  Civil  Establishments,  Sir  Thomas  H. 
Farrer,  who  had  been  a  Member  of  the  Playfair  Royal 
Commission  of  1876,  and  had  been  Permanent  Secre- 
tary of  the  Board  of  Trade  from  1867  to  1886,  said :  "I 
should  like  to  say  that  in  the  discussion  which  led  [in 
1872]  to  the  adoption  of  Mr.  Lowe's  [Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer]  scheme^  [for  the  reform  of  the  civil 
service]  a  mistake  was  often  made,  and  is  still  made, 
in  supposing  that  the  great  evil  of  the  service  is  job- 
bery. That  is  not  the  case,  and  I  say 
Pvoftiotiofi  &v 

Seniority,  not  ^^  ^^^^  ^^^^^  Confidence,  having  regard 
Jobbery,  the  to  what  has  been  done  by  Ministers 
Public  Service's  ^^^^^^  j  ^^^^  gerved  of  both  parties. 
weak  Point  .  . 

The  real  evil  of  the  service  is  promotion 

by  routine,  and  not  jobbing  in  the  selection  for 
superior  places.^     But  make  your  regulations  what  you 

^Report  of  the  Bradford  Committee  on  Post  Office  Wages,  1904; 
q.   1,024  and   1,048. 

^  Mr.  Lowe,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  divided  the  service 
into  three  classes,  in  such  a  way  that  it  was  difficult,  if  not  im- 
possible, to  pass  from  one  class  to  the  other.  That  was  done  with 
the  object  of  preventing  individuals  from  bringing  pressure  on  Mem- 
bers of  Parliament  for  promotion  from  class  to  class. 

'  Compare  also :  Third  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on 
Civil  Services  Expenditure,  1873  ;  q.  3,703  to  3,705,  Mr.  T.  H.  Farrer, 
Permanent    Secretary   of   the   Board    of   Trade.     "The    salt    of   the 

service  is  the   staff  appointments Since   I  have  been   in   the 

Board  of  Trade  there  have  been  almost  forty  higher  staff  appoint- 
ments, and  on  not  more  than  four  could  I  put  my  finger  and  say  they 
had  been  made  from  any  other  motive  than  the  desire  to  get  the 


272  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

will,  the  sine  qtta  non,  to  make  any  regulations  work 
well,  is  that  the  men  at  the  head  of  the  different  offices 
shall  have  discretion,  honesty,  and  courage,  and  shall 
not  be  afraid  to  put  up  the  good  men  and  to  keep  the 
inferior  men  in  their  place.  I  am  quite  confident  from 
my  own  experience  that  it  can  be  done,  but  I  am  cer- 
tain that  it  can  be  done  only  if  the  men  at  the  head  of 
the  offices  will  take  a  good  deal  of  trouble  about  it." 
Lord  Lingen,  a  Member  of  the  Royal  Commission,  and 
a  former  Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  inter- 
polated :  "A  good  deal  of  trouble  and  a  good  deal  of 
disagreeable  interference."  Mr.  Farrer  continued: 
"It  requires  tact,  because  of  course  you  must  not  put  a 
man  up  for  mere  merit.  You  cannot  take  a  lad  of  19 
and  put  him  over  a  man  of  30  without  a  very  strong 
reason;  but  taking  the  different  sub-heads  of  the  de- 
partment into  counsel ;  by  a  little  give  and  take ;  by  care, 
discretion,  and  confidence  in  the  perfect  honesty  with 
which  the  thing  is  done,  I  believe  it  can  be  perfectly 

well  managed The  key  of  the  whole  thing  is  to 

put  the  proper  men  at  the  top  of  the  offices." 

Lord  Lingen  and  Mr.  Farrer  then  went  on  to  state 
that  with  every  change  of  the  Government  of  the  day, 
some  civil  servants  who  had  been  passed  over,  or  had 
some  other  grievance,  made  the  attempt  to  have  their 
cases  reopened.* 

best  man.  On  some  occasions  the  good  appointments  have  been 
made  in  the  teeth  of  strong  political  motives  to  the  contrary." 

*  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
i'lto  the  Civil  Establishments^  1888;  q.  19,980,  and  20,079  to  20,083. 


I 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       273 

Sir  Charles  DuCane,  Chairman  of  the  Commission- 
ers of  Customs,  said :  "We  promote  strictly  by  merit ; 
we  never  allow  seniority  to  weigh  with  us."^ 

Sir  Algernon  E.  West,  Chairman  of  the  Commis- 
sioners of  Inland  Revenue,  said  that  he  promoted  by 
merit  within  the  limits  allowed  him  by  the  Treasury 
ruling  that  no  clerk  could  pass  out  of  the  second  class 
into  the  first  class  without  lo  years'  service  in  the 
second  class.  Subsequent  testimony  established  the  fact 
that  the  Treasury  had  made  that  ruling  in  order  to  pre- 
vent the  second  class  clerks  from  bringing  pressure  on 
Members  of  Parliament  with  the  view  to  securing  auto- 
matic promotion  from  the  second  class  into  the  first.^ 
Just  before  making  the  foregoing  statement,  Sir  Alger- 
non West  had  said :  "If  you  take  the  whole  Civil  Serv- 
ice, I  think  you  will  find  a  general  concord  of  opinion 
that  the  man  receiving  from  $2,500  to  $3,000  a  year 
is  the  weakest  part  of  the  Civil  Service.  I  am  not 
speaking  of  a  young  man  who  is  in  process  of  going 
higher,  but  of  an  elderly  man  who  has  risen  to  that 
kind  of  high  salary,  and  has  no  prospect  of  getting 

anything  more An   ordinary   middle   aged   man, 

who  has  got  to  $2,500  or  $3,000  or  $3,500,  generally 
is  far  too  highly  paid."  Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  a  Mem- 
ber of  the  Royal  Commission,  queried:  "How  would 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.   17,564. 

^Second  Report   of   the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into    the   Civil   Establishments,    1888;    q.    17,500,    20,141    to    20,149, 
20,260,  20,262  and  20,338 ;  and  First  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission 
appointed  to  inquire  into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1887,  p.  424. 
18 


274  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

he  get  such  a  position  ?"  The  answer  came :  "By  natu- 
ral progression,"  i.  e.  promotion  b)r  routine.^ 

Sir  Lyon  Playfair,  a  man  of  vast  experience  in  the 
administration  of  the  British  Civil  Service,  said :  "Pro- 
motions by  merit  hardly  take  place  in  most  offices,  I 
think;  at  all  events,  there  are  very  few  instances 
brought  before  us."^ 

The  Royal  Commission  itself  reported:  "We  think 
that  promotion  by  seniority  is  the  great  evil  of  the 
Service,  and  that  it  is  indispensable  to  proceed  through- 
Promotion  by  ^"^  ^^^^^  branch  of  it  strictly  on  the 
Seniority  the  principle  of  promotion  by  merit,  that 
Great  Evil  jg  ^^  ^^^^  ^^  selecting  always  the  fittest 

man,  instead  of  considering  claims  in  order  of  senior- 
ity, and  rejecting  only  the  unfit.  It  is  no  doubt  true 
that  objections  on  the  score  of  favoritism  may  arise  in 
the  application  of  such  a  rule  in  public  departments,  and 
the  intervention  of  Members  of  Parliament  also  pre- 
sents an  obvious  difficulty,  but  we  think  that  such  con- 
stant vigilance,  tact,  and  resolution  as  may  fairly  be 
expected  on  the  part  of  heads  of  branches  and  of  offices, 
will  meet  these  objections,  and  we  believe  that  the  cer- 
tain advantages  of  promotion  by  merit  to  the  most  de- 
serving men,  and  therefore  to  the  public  service,  are 
so  great  as  to  be  sure,  in  the  long  run,  to  command 
public  support." 

*  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.  17,250  to  17.253. 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.  20,253. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       275 

Shortly  before  the  Royal  Commission  had  made  this 
recommendation,  in  words  which  seemed  to  place  the 
responsibility  for  past  failure  to  promote  by  merit,  on 
the  permanent  officers  of  the  Departments,  as  distin- 
guished from  the  political  heads  of  the  Departments, 
the  Ministers,  Mr.  Raikes,  the  Postmaster  General,  and 
the  representative  in  the  House  of  Commons  of  the 
University  of  Cambridge,  had  refused  to  accept  the  ad- 
vice of  the  Permanent  Secretary  of  the  Post  CWifice,  Mr. 
S.  A.  Blackwood,  in  filling  a  post  of  some  importance 
in  the  Secretary's  office.  On  March  i,  1887,  the  Post- 
master General,  Mr.  Raikes,  in  reply  to  questions  put 
to  him  in  the  House  of  Commons,  said : . .  . .  "It  is  also 
the  fact  that  I  have  recently  declined  to  adopt  the  Sec- 
retary's recommendation  to  promote  to  the  first  class 
[in  the  Secretary's  office]  one  of  the  junior  officers  in 
the  second  class  over  the  heads  of  several  clerks  of 
much  longer  standing.  The  gentleman  whom  I  have 
promoted  was,  in  my  judgment,  fully  qualified  for 
promotion,  and  was  senior  clerk  in  the  class,  with  the 
exception  of  one  officer  who,  on  the  Secretary's  recom- 
mendation, has  been  passed  over  on  sixteen  occasions. 
....  What  was  I  asked  to  do  ?  I  was  asked  to  pro- 
mote a  gentleman  who  was  much  lower  down  in  the 
class,  a  gentleman  who  was  third  or  fourth  in  the  class, 
Able  Men  must  ^"^  ^o  place  him  over  the  heads  of  his 
"wait  their  Turn"  colleagues.  This  I  declined  to  do.  I 
made  inquiries  in  the  office,  and  I  found  that  the  gentle- 
man who  was  promoted  was  a  meritorious  officer  who 


276  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

had  discharged  his  duties  with  adequate  ability,  and 
therefore  I  thought  there  was  xio  reason  for  promot- 
ing over  his  head  and  over  the  heads  of  one  or  two 
other  competent  officers,  a  junior  officer  who  could 
well  afford  to  wait  his  turn.  I  acted  in  the  interests 
of  the  Public  Service,  and  especially  in  the  interests 
of  the  Department  itself."^ 

No  Post  Office  official  in  the  United  Kingdom  has 
power  to  make  a  promotion.  No  one  has  power  to  do 
more  than  recommend  for  promotion.  Each  recom- 
mendation for  promotion  is  examined  by  the  surveyor, 
and  is  then  sent  to  headquarters,  where  "a  most  vigi- 
lant check  is  always  exercised,  not  from  the  suspicion 
that  there  has  been  favoritism,  but  in  order  to  secure 
that  favoritism  shall  not  be  practised."^     Ultimately 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  i,  1887,  p.  890; 
March  7,  p.  1,400;  May  12,  p.  1,723;  and  April  4,  p.  456. 

'Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OfUce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  12,152  to  12,154,  Mr.  H.  Joyce,  Third 
Secretary  to  General  Post  Office.  Compare  also:  q.  131  and  7*89 1, 
and  Appendix,  p.  1,068. 

Extract  from  the  "Postmaster's  Book  of  Instructions,"  p.  105. 
"Except  to  clerkships  of  first  class,  all  promotions  from  class  to 
class,  whether  in  the  Major  or  Minor  Establishments,  are  governed 
by  seniority,  combined  with  full  competency  and  good  character. 
Thus,  on  a  vacancy  occurring  in  a  higher  class,  not  being  the  first 
class  of  clerks,  recommend  for  promotion  that  officer  of  highest 
standing  [according  to  seniority]  in  the  class  next  below  who  is 
qualified  for  the  efficient  performance  of  the  duties  of  the  higher 
class,  and  has  conducted  himself  with  diligence,  propriety  and 
attention  in  his  present  class  to  your  satisfaction.  If  on  the  other 
hand  you  feel  it  incumbent  on  you  to  recommend  some  officer  other 
than  the  one  of  highest  standing  [according  to  seniority]  in  his 
class,  furnish  a  tabular  statement  after  the  following  specimens, 
giving  the  names  and  dates  of  appointment  of  those  you  propose  to 
pass  over,  and  your  reasons.  These  reasons  must  be  stated  with 
precision  in  the  column  set  apart  for  observations.  Such  entries 
as:  'Scarcely  qualified,'  'has  not  given  satisfaction,'  being  in- 
sufficient in  so  important  a  matter." 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       277 

the  Postmaster  General  passes  upon  every  recommenda- 
tion. Sometimes  the  action  of  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral is  merely  formal,  and  is  limited  to  the  mere  affixing 
of  the  Postmaster  General's  signature  to  the  recom- 
mendation made  by  the  permanent  officers  of  the 
Department ;  at  other  times  it  is  independent,  and  is  pre- 
ceded by  careful  consideration  of  the  case  by  the  Post- 
master General  himself.  Whether  or  not  the  Post- 
master General  shall  give  his  personal  attention  to 
a  recommendation  for  promotion,  is  determined  largely 
by  the  presence  or  absence  of  the  political  element,  that 
is,  the  temper  of  the  House  of  Commons.  The  Post- 
master General  is  not  a  mere  executive  officer  with  a 
single  aim :  the  efficient  administration  of  his  Depart- 
ment. He  is  first  of  all  an  important  Minister,  that 
is,  one  of  the  aids  of  the  Prime  Minister  in  keeping 
intact  the  party  following.  He  must  know  to  a  nicety 
how  any  given  administrative  act  in  the  Post  Office 
will  affect  his  party's  standing,  first  in  Parliament,  and 
then  among  the  constituents  of  the  Members  of  Par- 
liament. It  is  true  that  no  British  Postmaster  Gen*- 
eral  would  convert  the  Post  Office  into  a  political  en- 
gine for  promoting  the  interests  of  his  party ;  but  it  is 
equally  true  that  no  British  Postmaster  General  would 
for  a  moment  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that  Governments 
have  not  their  being  m  either  a  vacuum  or  a  Utopia, 
but  that  they  live  in  a  medium  constituted  of  Members 
of  Parliament  and  the  constituents  of  Members  of  Par- 
liament. 


278  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

In  the  course  of  a  protest  against  the  Postmaster 
General  being  a  Member  of  the  House  of  Lords,  Sir 
H.  H.  Fowler^  recently  said :  "No  man  who  has  sat  in 
the  House  of  Commons  for  to  years  can  be  ignorant 
of  the  fact  that  there  is  a  tone  in  the  House ;  that  there 
are  occasions  in  the  House  when,  in  dealing  with  votes 
[of  Supply]  and  administrative  questions,  a  Minister 
is  required,  who,  with  his  finger  on  the  pulse  of  the 
House,  can  sweep  away  the  red  tape  limits  and  deal 
with  the  questions  at  once  on  broad  general  public 
grounds.'*  To  make  the  statement  complete,  Sir  H. 
H.  Fowler  should  have  added  the  words :  "and  grounds 
of  political  expediency."  In  the  course  of  his  reply 
to  Sir  H.  H.  Fowler,  Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  Financial 
Secretary  to  the  Treasury  and  representative  in  the 
House  of  Commons  of  the  Postmaster  General,  said: 
"When  I  undertook  the  representation  of  the  Post 
Office  in  the  House  of  Commons,  the  first  rule  I  laid 
down  was  that  [in  replying  to  questions  put  by  Mem- 
bers as  to  the  administrative  acts  of  the  Post  Office]  I 
would  take  no  answer  from  a  permanent  official,  and 
that  all  answers  [framed  in  tEe  first  instance  by  per- 
manent officials]  should  be  seen  and  approved  by  the 
Postmaster  General  [a  Member  of  the  House  of  Lords] . 
I  also  reserved  to  myself  full  discretion  to  alter  the 
answers  if  I  saw  any  necessity  so  to  do."^ 

^  Who's  Who,  190S,  Fowler,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  H.  H.,  M.  P.  (L.), 
Wolverhampton,  1880  to  1900,  and  since  1900;  Under  Secretary 
Home  Department,  1884-85;  Financial  Secretary  to  Treasury,  1886; 
President  Local  Government  Board,  1892-94;  Secretary  of  State  for 
India,  1894-95. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  27,  1900,  p.  128,  Sir 
H.  H.  Fowler,  and  Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       279 

In  1896,  before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee,  Mr. 
H.  Joyce,  Third  Secretary  to  General  Post  Office,  Lon- 
don, said :  "I  well  remember  Mr.  Fawcett's*  address  to 
the  head  of  a  large  Department  [of  the  Post  Office] 
who, ....  having  a  large  number  of  promotions  to 
recommend,  had  told  the  officers  concerned  whom  he 
The  Anxieties  ^^^  recommended,  and  whom  he  had 
of  Postmasters  not,  and  what  made  the  matters  worse, 
General  ^^  j^^^^  jj^  l^jg  recommendations  taken 

little  account  of  seniority,  whereas  Mr.  Fawcett,  like 
Mr.  Arnold  Morley,^  had  a  perfect  horror  of  passing 
anyone  over.  I  only  saw  Mr.  Fawcett  angry  on  two 
occasions,  and  that  was  one  of  them."^  A  moment 
before  giving  this  testimony,  Mr.  Joyce  had  said :  "It 
is  always  a  matter  of  deep  regret  to  the  Postmaster 
General — every  Postmaster  General  under  whom  I 
have  served — when  he  is  constrained  to  pass  anyone 
over.  I  have  seen  Mr.  Arnold  Morley  in  the  greatest 
distress  on  such  occasions.'*^  Again,  in  defending  the 
action  of  the  Post  Office  in  promoting  one  Bocking,  a 
second  class  sorting  clerk  at  Norwich,  over  the  heads 
of  1 5  men  in  his  own  class,  and  8  men  in  the  first  class, 

*Mr.  Fawcett,  Postmaster  General. 

*Mr.  Arnold  Morley,  Postermaster  General,  1892-95  ;  Chief  Liberal 
Whip,  1886-1892. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  12,220. 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office  Es- 
tablishments, 1897;  q.  12,158.  Compare,  for  example,  Hansard's 
Parliamentary  Debates,  September  18,  1893.  Mr.  A.  Morley,  Post- 
master General,  states  that  10  men  had  been  passed  over,  after 
having  been  found  wanting  upon  a  trial  on  higher  duties.  He 
added:  "I  am,  however,  making  further  inquiries." 


280    *       THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

to  a  full  clerkship,  Mr.  Joyce  said :  "It  is  a  matter  of 
the  greatest  regret  to  the  Postmaster  General  to  feel 
constrained  to  pass  over  so  many  officers,  all  of  whom 
were  thoroughly  respectable  and  zealous,  and  per- 
formed the  duties  on  which  they  were  employed  very 
well,  but  the  lamentable  fact  remains  that  they  were 
not  fit  for  a  higher  position ;  every  endeavor  was  made 
at  headquarters  to  what  I  might  call  squeeze  them 
through,  but  it  was  no  use."  Mr.  Badcock,  Controller 
London  Postal  Service,  corroborated  this  testimony 
with  the  words:  "The  statement  is  absolutely  correct. 
The  reports  on  which  it  was  based  can  be  produced."^ 
In  passing  it  may  be  added  that  in  February,  1895,  Mr. 
R.  J.  Price,  M.  P.,  for  Norfolk,  East,  sought  to  in- 
tervene from  the  floor  of  the  House  of  Commons  in 
this  case  of  promotion.  In  1892  and  1895,  Mr.  Price 
had  been  returned  to  Parliament  from  Norfolk,  East, 
with  majorities  of  respectively  440  votes  and  198  votes. 
Still,  again,  at  the  Barry  Dock  Post  Office,  a  branch 
office  in  Cardiff,  one  Arnold  had  been  promoted  from 
position  number  9,  by  seniority,  among  the  second 
class  telegraph  clerks,  to  a  full  clerkship,  skipping  class 
I  of  the  telegraphists.  Of  this  action,  Mr.  Joyce  said  : 
"It  was  a  matter  of  great  regret  to  the  Postmaster 
General,  as  expressed  at  the  time,  to  pass  so  many  offi- 
cers, many  of  them  most  deserving  men,  but  above 
Mr.  Arnold  there  was  actually  no  one  competent  to  fill 

^Report   of    the    Inter-Departmental   Committee    on   Post    OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  12,180,  and  Appendix,  p,  1,110. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       281 

this  important  post.  Some  had  a  knowledge  of  postal 
work,  and  some  a  knowledge  of  telegraph  work,  but 
none  [beside  Mr.  Arnold]  were  conversant  with  work 
of  both  kinds,  and  some  were  otherwise  objectionable. 
Barry  Dock  had  suddenly  shot  into  existence  as  a  large 
town,  which  has  now  a  population  of  about  13,000, 
and  so  painful  was  it  to  the  Postmaster  General  to  pass 
over  all  these  deserving  officers,  that,  rather  than  do 
so,  he  seriously  contemplated  raising  Barry  Dock  to 
the  level  of  a  post  town,  and  giving  it  a  separate  estab- 
lishment of  its  own."^  Again,  one  Robinson  was 
transferred  from  the  Post  Office  at  Pontefract  to  a 
clerkship  in  the  office  of  Blackpool,  being  made  to  pass 
over  the  heads  of  two  young  men  at  Blackpool,  by  name 
of  Eaton  and  Butcher.  Mr.  Joyce  said:  "The  case 
was  specially  put  before  the  Postmaster  General,  and 
with  all  his  horror  of  passing  people  over,  he  decided 
that  the  two  young  men  Eaton  and  Butcher  were  not 
qualified  for  promotion."^ 

In  1885,  one  Robinson,  a  postman  at  Liverpool,  and 
number  210  in  his  class,  was  jumped  to  the  position  of 
assistant  inspector.  "He  had,  when  a  young  postman, 
been  selected  by  his  inspector  as  a  superior  and  promis- 
ing officer.  He  had  been  temporarily  employed  [by 
way  of  tests]  as  assistant  inspector,  and  had  discharged 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897  ;  q.  12,205. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  Q-  12,184  and  12,185. 


282  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  duties  so  efficiently  that,  on  a  vacancy  occurring, 
he  had  been  promoted  to  it."  This  case,  as  well  as 
"A  Strong  those  previously  mentioned,  were  cited 
Order"  as  "grievances,"  before  the  Tweed- 
mouth  Committee,  by  the  men  selected  by  the  Post 
Office  employees  to  act  as  their  spokesmen  before  the 
Committee.  Lord  Tweedmouth,  chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee, commenting  on  the  case,  said  to  Mr.  Joyce: 
"Still,  it  seems  to  have  been  rather  a  strong  order  to 
appoint  an  assistant  postman  to  such  an  office  and  to 
give  him  such  a  great  promotion."  Mr.  Joyce  replied : 
"Yes,  it  certainly  does  seem  so ;  but  for  the  position  of 
inspector  or  assistant  inspector  of  postmen  there  is  no 
doubt  that  qualifications  are  required  which  are  not 
ordinarily  to  be  found  in  postmen For  the  posi- 
tions of  inspectors  and  assistant  inspectors,  I  think  I 
may  say  that  the  local  authorities,  and  also  headquar- 
ters, are  more  particular  than  they  are  about  any  other 
promotion,  and  they  are  most  anxious  to  select  actually 
the  best  man.  In  almost  every  other  promotion,  very 
great  allowance  is  made  for  seniority;  but  in  the  case 
of  inspectors  it  is  not  so,  on  account  of  the  somewhat 
rare  qualities  required  of  inspectors,  and  because  the 
post  is  a  most  invidious  one."* 

The  reader  will  note  that  in  1896  the  Post  Office 
employees  were  complaining  of  a  promotion  made  in 
1885. 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMct 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  12,230  and  12,239. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER      283 

It  was  established  before  the  Tweedmouth  Commit- 
tee that  in  instances  the  Post  Office  employees,  with  the 
aid  of  Members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  have  suc- 
ceeded in  forcing  the  Post  Office  to  revoke  promotions, 
or  to  promote  men  that  have  been  passed  over.  Bor 
example,  Mr.  Joyce,  Third  Secretary,  General  Post  Of- 
fice, said :  "Wykes  is  unquestionably  a  very  able  man — 
The  Ablest  Man  pi'obably  the  ablest  man  in  the  Sheffield 
in  the  SheMeld  office — and  it  is  quite  true  that  he  was 
^^^^  promoted  [from  a  second  class  sorter- 

ship]  to  be  an  assistant  superintendent ;  but  for  reasons 
quite  unconnected  with  his  ability  and  qualifications, 
that  promotion  has  been  cancelled.  Having  said  that, 
I  trust  the  Committee  will  not  press  me  further  upon 
the  point,  inasmuch  as  it  is  very  undesirable  that  I 
should  say  more."  Mr.  Spencer  Walpole,  a  Member 
of  the  Committee  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Post  Office, 
added:  "Except,  perhaps,  that  the  cancelling  of  that 
promotion  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  evidence  that 
has  been  quoted?"  Mr.  Joyce  replied:  "It  had  noth- 
ing to  do  with  that;  the  matter  is  still  in  a  certain 
sense  suhjudice."'^ 

In  1887,  one  M'Dougall,  a  second  class  sorter  in 
Liverpool,  was  made  a  first  class  sorter,  being  pro- 
moted over  the  heads  of  14  men  whom  the  Liverpool 
postmaster  had  reported  to  be  "not  qualified  for  the 
duties  of  the  higher  class."     On  March  31,  1887,  Mr. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OfUce 
Establishments,    1897;   q.    12,182   and   5,629. 


284  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Bradlaugh  brought  the  matter  up  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  by  means  of  a  question  addressed  to  the 
Postmaster  General.  He  was  not  satisfied  with  the 
answer  that  the  men  passed  over  had  been  reported 
"not  quahfied  for  promotion."^  Therefore,  on  June 
6,  1887,  in  Committee  of  Supply,  on  the  Post  Office 
Vote,  Mr.  Bradlaugh  again  brought  up  the  case  of  the 
14  Liverpool  sorters  who  had  been  passed  over.  He 
said  he  had  personally  investigated  the  qualifications 
of  the  men,  and  had  found  "that  none  of  them  war- 
ranted the  answer  given  by  the  Postmaster  General" 
[on  March  31].^  Mr.  Bradlaugh  also  brought  up  the 
case  of  one  Hegnett,  who  had  been  made  assistant 
An  M.  P.  pro-  superintendent  over  the  heads  of  19 
motes  Eleven  Men  persons  "who  were  his  seniors  by  many 
years."  Also  the  case  of  one  Helsby,  promoted  over 
the  heads  of  11  persons.  Also  the  case  of  one  Miller, 
promoted  over  one  Richardson,  "who  had  been  acting 
as  assistant  superintendent  for  years  with  the  salary  of 
a  Supervising  Clerk  only."  Mr.  Bradlaugh  spoke  of 
the  Committee  of  Supply  as  "the  only  tribunal  that  can 
overrule  the  Postmaster  General."  On  June  17,  Mr. 
Bradlaugh  again  intervened  on  behalf  of  the  14  men 
who  had  been  passed  over. 

Before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee,  Mr.  F.  T. 
Crosse,  a  sorting  clerk  at  Bristol,  and  one  of  the  spokes- 
men of  the  Post  Office  employees,  said :  "Macdougall, 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  31,  1883,  p.  55. 
^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  6,    1887,  p.   1,081    and 
following. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       285 

Liverpool,  a  second  class  sorting  clerk,  was  promoted 
to  the  first  class  over  the  heads  of  14  men,  his  seniors. 
Mr.  Bradlaugh,  M.  P.,  brought  the  matter  up  in  Par- 
liament during  the  discussion  on  the  Estimates.  The 
result  of  Mr.  Bradlaugh's  intervention  was  that  11  of 
the  14  men  passed  over  were  promoted  in  a  batch  six 
months  later." 

Mr.  Joyce,  Third  Secretary  to  General  Post  Office, 
London,  said  it  was  true  that  "very  soon  afterward," 
II  of  the  14  men  were  promoted.^  "A  great  point  was 
stretched"  in  favor  of  5  of  the  1 1  men^  Those  5  men 
were  technically  called  single  duty  men,  and  since  1881 
no  sorting  clerk  had  been  promoted  to  the  first  class 
[at  Liverpool]  who  could  not  perform  dual  duty.  Al- 
though these  five  men  were  single  duty  men,  and  there- 
fore unable  to  rotate  with  others,  which  was  a  "great 
disability,"  they  were  promoted  by  reason  of  Mr.  Brad- 
laugh's  intervention. 

In  explanation  of  the  Bradlaugh  episode,  it  should 
be  added,  that  dual  duty  men  are  those  who  are  able 
to  act  as  letter  sorters  as  well  as  telegraphists;  while 
single  duty  men  are  able  to  act  only  as  sorters,  or  as 
telegraphists.  In  order  to  reap  full  advantage  from 
the  consolidation  of  the  telegraph  business  with  the 
Postal  business,  the  Post  Office  for  years  has  been  seek- 
ing to  induce  as  many  as  possible  of  its  employees  to 
make  themselves  competent  to  act  both  as  sorters  and 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897  ;  q.   5,603  and  12,160  to   12,162. 


286  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

as  telegraphists.  At  offices  where  it  would  be  particu- 
larly advantageous  to  have  the  men  able  to  act  both  as 
sorters  and  as  telegraphists,  the  Post  Office  has  sought 
to  establish  the  rule  that  no  sorter  or  telegraphist  shall 
be  promoted  to  the  first  class,  unless  able  to  act  both  as 
sorter  and  as  telegraphist. 

Mr.  Crosse  was  not  the  only  witness  before  the 
Tweedmouth  Committee  whose  testimony  illustrated 
"the  stimulus"  conveyed  by  questions  in  the  House  of 
Commons.  Mr.  C.  J.  Ansell,  the  representative  of  the 
second  class  tracers  in  London,  stated  that  in  1891  two 
vacancies  among  the  first  class  tracers  in  a  London  office 
had  been  left  open  for  respectively  5  months  and  8 
months.  He  added:  "In  March,  1894,  the  Postmaster 
General's  attention  had  to  be  called  to  this  disgraceful 
state  of  affairs  [by  the  tracers'  union].  It  required, 
however,  the  stimulus  of  a  question  in  the  House  of 
Commons.  We  do  not  know  how  far  the  Postmaster 
General  is  responsible  for  this  state  of  affairs,  but  it 
is  only  fair  to  state  that  his  attention  being  drawn  to 
this  matter  by  the  question,  we  were  successful  in  get- 
ting those  promotions  ante-dated."^ 

The  limitations  upon  the  Postmaster  General's  power 
to  promote  men  in  accordance  with  the  advice  tendered 
him  by  his  official  advisers  by  no  means  is  confined  to 
the  cases  of  promotion  among  the  rank  and  file.     For 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  the  Post  OfUce 
Establishments,  1897 ;  q.  6,983. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       287 

instance,  it  was  established  by  the  testimony  given  be- 
fore the  Tweedmouth  Committee,  that  the  Postmaster 
cannot  freely  promote,  to  offices  of  more  importance, 
postmasters  who  show  that  they  have  more  ability  than 
is  required  to  administer  the  offices  over  which  they 
happen  to  preside.  For  if  a  postmaster  proves  to  be 
not  equal  to  the  demands  of  his  office,  the  Postmaster 
General  cannot  always  remove  him  to  a  smaller  office, 
promoting  at  the  same  time  the  more  able  man  who 
happens  to  be  in  charge  of  the  smaller  office.  The 
Department  tries  to  meet  the  situation  by  sending  to 
the  aid  of  the  relatively  incompetent  postmaster  "a 
smart  chief  clerk,"  taking  care,  however,  that  the  in- 
efficient postmaster  shall  receive  less  than  the  full  salary 
to  which  the  volume  of  business  of  the  office  would 
entitle  him.  If  that  expedient  fails,  the  Department 
will  transfer  the  postmaster.  Mr.  Uren,  postmaster  at 
Maidstone,  and  President  of  the  Postmasters'  Asso- 
ciation, even  asserted  that  nothing  short  of  misconduct 
would  lead  to  the  transfer  of  a  postmaster.^  It  should 
be  added,  however,  that  Mr.  Uren's  testimony  related 
to  the  small  and  medium  sized  places  only,  not  to  the 
larger  cities.^ 

It  must  not  be  inferred,   however,   that  the  post- 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  the  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897;  Mr.  J.  G.  Uren,  President  Postmasters'  Asso- 
ciation; q.  12,493  and  following;  and  Mr.  E.  B.  L.  Hill,  Assistant 
Secretary  General  Post  Office;  q.  15,450. 

^  "But  I  do  not  think  I  ought  to  conceal  the  fact  that  the  majority 
of  our  members  are  the  postmasters  of  small  and  medium  sized 
places  who  have  very  likely  got,  according  to  our  ideas,  more 
grounds  for  grievance  than  the  postmasters  of  larger  towns." 


288  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

masters  of  the  small  and  medium  sized  places  appeared 
before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee  to  demand  unre- 
stricted promotion  by  merit.  On  the  contrary,  with 
the  great  bulk  of  the  public  service  of  all  descriptions/ 
they  held  that  promotion  is  "slow  and  uncertain"  and 
that  the  system  of  promotion  by  merit  "is  thoroughly 
uncertain  in  its  practical  working."  They  protested 
also  against  the  uncertainty  and  inequality  inseparable 
from  the  system  of  making  postmasters'  salaries  de- 
pendent upon  the  volume  of  business  done  by  the  sev- 
eral and  individual  Post  Offices.  They  held  that  no 
postmaster  should  be  made  to  suffer  by  reason  of  the 
fact  that  he  happened  to  be  stationed  in  a  town  or  city 
that  was  not  growing,  or  was  not  growing  so  rapidly 
as  were  other  cities.  By  way  of  relief  from  the  fore- 
going "uncertainties"  and  "inequalities"  they  de- 
manded a  reorganization  of  the  postal  service  which 
should  secure  to  the  postmasters  regular  annual  incre- 
ments of  pay,   and  should   "regularize"   promotion.^ 

*  That  the  peculiar  demands  and  ideals  described  in  these  chap- 
ters are  by  no  means  confined  to  the  Post  Office  employees,  is  shown 
by  the  subjoined  quotation  from  a  Treasury  Minute  of  March,  1891, 
relative  to  an  Inquiry  by  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  and  the 
Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury  into  the  Administration  of  the 
Outdoor  Department  of  the  Customs  Revenue  Department,  to  wit : 
"Besides  the  alleged  loss  of  promotion  through  a  reduction  in  the 
higher  appointments,  and  the  various  arrangements  by  which  they 
considered  that  they  were  injured  in  their  emoluments  or  as  to  the 
hours  of  working,  the  officers  of  all  grades  complained  of  the  exist- 
ing system  of  promotion.  They  contended  that  it  was  unfair  and 
fortuitous  in  its  operation,  and  did  not  pay  sufficient  regard  to 
seniority." — Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  the 
Post  OMce  Establishments,  1897  ;  q.  12,577. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  the  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897.  Testimony  of  the  representatives  of  the 
Postmasters'  Association:  Mr.  J.  G.  Uren,  Mr.  W.  E.  Carrette 
(Queenstown),  Mr.  John  Macmaster;  and  Appendix,  p.  1,127. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       289 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  Royal  Commission 
appointed  to  inquire  into  the  Civil  Establishments, 
1888,  expressed  the  belief:  ''that  the  certain  advantages 
of  promotion  by  merit  to  the  most  deserving  men,  and 
therefore  to  the  public  service,  are  so  great  as  to  be 
sure,  in  the  long  run,  to  command  public  support." 
But  the  fact  remains  that  a  large  part  of  the  rank  and 
file  of  the  British  civil  service  is  growing  more  and 
Rank  and  File  ^^^^  intolerant  of  promotion  by  merit, 
Oppose  Promo-  and  demands  promotion  by  seniority. 
Hon  by  Merit         j^  ^ju  j^^^  ^^^.^^^  ^g  a  fact  the  natural 

inequality  of  men;  it  asserts,  with  its  cousins  at  the 
Antipodes,  the  Australasian  civil  servants,  that  it  is 
the  opportunity  that  makes  the  man,  not  the  man  that 
makes  the  opportunity.  This  impatience  of  the  rank 
and  file  of  the  civil  servants  of  promotion  by  merit  was 
brought  out  in  striking  manner  by  many  of  the  "griev- 
ances" cited  by  the  men  who  appeared  before  the 
Tweedmouth  Committee  as  the  accredited  representa- 
tives of  the  Post  Office  employees.  Some  of  those 
allegations  of  grievance  have  just  been  recorded,  but 
this  matter  is  of  sufficient  importance  to  warrant  the 
recording  of  still  others. 

Mr.  Joseph  Shephard,  Chairman  of  the  Metropolitan 
Districts  Board  of  the  Postal  Telegraph  Clerks'  Asso- 
ciation, complained  before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee 
that  one  West,  who  had  entered  the  telegraph  service 
as  a  learner  in  1881,  one  month  after  one  Ward  had 
entered  as  a  learner,  In  1896  was  receiving  $640, 
19 


290  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

whereas  Ward  was  receiving  only  $550.  It  was  true 
that  Ward  had  'liad  the  misfortune  to  fail  in  the 
needle  examination,"  the  first  time  he  had  tried  to 
qualify  as  a  telegraphist,  but  "that  little  failure"  ought 
not  to  have  made  the  difference  which  existed  in  1896. 
Mr.  Shephard  also  complained  that  one  Morgan,  after 
14  years  and  1 1  months  of  service,  was  receiving  only 
$550^  whereas  one  Kensington,  after  14  years  and  5 
months  of  service,  was  receiving  $670.  He  brushed 
aside  as  of  no  consequence,  the  fact  that  Kensington 
had  "qualified"  in  four  months,  whereas  Ward  had 
taken  twelve  months  to  "qualify."^ 

One  Richardson,  a  telegraphist,  at  his  own  request 
had  been  transferred  from  Horsham  to  East  Grin- 
stead,  and  thence  to  Redhill,  because  of  the  small 
chances  of  vacancies  at  the  first  two  places.  But  the 
staff  at  Redhill  was  weak  and  therefore  the  Post  Office 
could  not  follow  its  usual  practice  of  promoting  a  man, 
"not  because  he  is  a  good  man,  but  because  he  is  not  a 
bad  one,"  to  use  the  words  of  Mr.  J.  C.  Badcock,  Con- 
troller London  Postal  Service.^  The  authorities  had 
to  promote  the  best  man  at  Redhill,  and  thus  Richard- 
son was  passed  over.  Mr.  James  Green,  who  appeared 
as  the  representative  of  the  Postal  Telegraph  Clerks' 
Association,  referred  to  Richardson's  case  as  "the  case 


^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OfRce 
Establishments,  1897,  Mr.  Joseph  Shephard;  q.  3.117  to  3,126,  and 
testimony  of  Mr.  J.  C.  Badcock,  Controller  London  Postal  Service. 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  or  Post  Office 
Establishments ,  1897  ;  q.   1,614. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       291 

of  a  learner  who  with  some  5  years'  service  is,  accord- 
ing to  my  information,  sent  here  and  there  reHeving, 
presumably  as  a  sort  of  recompense,  though  what  his 
future  will  be  remains  a  mystery.  What  surprises  me 
in  this  matter  is  the  spirit  of  indifference  displayed  by 
the  heads  of  our  Department  regarding  the  hopeless- 
ness of  these  learners'  positions."^  One  J.  R.  Walker 
was  an  indoor  messenger  until  October,  1893,  when 
he  was  apprenticed  a  paid  learner.  Shortly  before 
October,  two  lads  had  been  brought  in  as  paid  learners; 
and,  after  a  short  service,  they  were  appointed  sorting 
clerks  and  telegraphists.  They  were  promoted  over 
Walker,  because  of  their  superior  education  and  intel- 
ligence. Mr.  Green,  the  representative  of  the  Postal 
Telegraph  Clerks'  Association,  admitted  the  superior 
education  of  the  lads  in  question,  but  complained  that 
they  had  been  preferred  to  Walker.^ 

One  Crompton,  a  letter  sorting  clerk  at  Liverpool, 
in  his  leisure  moments  had  made  himself  a  telegraph 
instrument,  had  taught  himself  to  telegraph,  and  had 
acquired  a  considerable  technical  knowledge  of  elec- 
The  Crompton  tricity.  He  had  attracted  the  atten- 
Episode  tion  of  the  superintending  engineer  at 

Liverpool;  had  been  promoted,  in  1886,  to  the  office  of 
the  superintending  engineer:  and,  by   1896,  he  had 

^  Report  of  ihe  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  15,219,  Mr.  Lewin  Hill,  Assistant  Secretary 
General  Post  Office,  London ;  and  5.290,  Mr.  Jas.  Green. 

'Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897  ;  q.  15,217,  Mr.  Lewin  Hill,  Assistant  Secretary 
General  Post  Office,  London ;  and  5,282  to  5,284,  MJr.  Jas.  Green, 


292  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

become  one  of  the  best  engineers  in  the  service.  In 
1896,  Mr.  Tipping,  the  accredited  spokesman  of  the 
Postal  Telegraphists'  Association  as  well  as  of  the 
Telegraph  Clerks'  Association,  complained  of  the  pro- 
motion of  Crompton,  which  had  occurred  in  1886. 
He  said:  "It  seems  most  unreasonable  that  men  who 
have,  in  some  cases,  not  the  slightest  acquaintance  with 
telegraphic  apparatus  and  methods  of  working,  should 
be  preferred  to  those  whose  whole  period  of  service 
has  been  passed  in  immediate  connection  therewith. 
It  is  apparent  that  such  an  absence  of  method  is  open 
to  very  serious  objections,  and  allows  great  freedom 
of  choice  to  those  upon  whose  recommendations  the 
appointments  are  made.  In  order,  therefore,  to  safe- 
guard, on  the  one  hand,  the  interests  of  the  depart- 
ment, and,  on  the  other,  to  encourage  those  members 
of  the  telegraph  staff  who  desire,  by  energy  and  ability, 
to  improve  their  official  status,  the  following  sugges- 
tions are  humbly  submitted :  That  vacancies  for  junior 
clerkships  in  the  offices  of  the  superintending  engineers, 
and  for  clerks  at  relay  stations,  should  be  filled  by  open 
competitive  examination,  held  under  the  control  of  the 
Civil  Service  Commissioners,  and  that  telegraphists 
only  be  eligible."^ 

The  Crompton  episode  shows  what  minute  super- 
vision over  the  administration  of  the  Post  Office  the 
civil  service  unions  seek  to  exercise.     The  same  minute 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897 ;  q.  15,097,  Mr.  W.  H.  Preece,  Engineer-in- 
Chief  at  the  Post  Office ;  and  4,876,  Mr.  E.  J.  Tipping. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       293 

supervision  was  attempted  as  recently  as  1903-04  by- 
Mr.  Nannetti,  M.  P.  for  the  College  Division  of  Dub- 
lin, and  also  a  Member  of  the  Corporation  of  Dublin, 
as  well  as  a  member  of  the  Dublin  Port  and  Docks 
Board.^  On  March  23,  1903,  Mr.  Nannetti  spoke  as 
follows,  in  the  House  of  Commons :  "I  beg  to  ask  the 
Postmaster  General  whether  his  attention  has  been 
directed  to  the  fact  that  two  female  technical  officers-, 
appointed  in  connection  with  the  recently  introduced 
intercommunication  switch  system  in  London,  were 
selected  over  the  heads  of  seniors  possessing  equal 
qualifications,  and  whether,  seeing  that  in  one  case  the 
official  selected  was  taught  switching  duties  by  a  teleg- 
raphist who  is  now  passed  over,  he  will  state  the  rea- 
son for  the  selection  of  these  officers?"  The  Post- 
master General,  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  replied: 
"The  honorable  Member  has  been  misinformed. 
There  is  no  question  of  promoting  or  passing  over  any 
officer.  All  that  has  been  done  is  to  assign  to  partic- 
ular duties,  carrying  no  special  rank  or  pay,  two 
officers  who  were  believed  to  be  competent  to  perform 
them."  On  May  7,  1903,  Mr.  Nannetti  followed  up 
the  question  with  another  one,  namely:  "I  beg  to  ask 
the  Postmaster  General  whether  his  attention  has  been 
called  to  the  fact  that  two  women  telegraphists  were 
selected  to  perform  technical  duties  in  reference  to  the 
intercommunication  switch  in  London,  who  were  jun- 
iors in  service  and  possessed  of  less  technical  qualifi- 

^  Who's  Who,  190S. 


294  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

cations  than  other  women  telegraphists  who  were 
passed  over ;  and  whether,  seeing  that,  although  official 
information  was  given  that  such  selection  was  not  a 
question  of  promotion  and  no  special  rank  or  pay  would 
result,  one  of  the  two  officers  concerned  has  been  ap- 
pointed to  a  superior  grade  on  account  of  her  expe- 
rience gained  by  being  selected  for  these  duties,  he  will 
explain  why  the  more  senior  and  experienced  women 
were  passed  over  in  the  first  place?"  The  Postmaster 
General  replied :  "I  have  nothing  to  add  to  the  answer 
I  gave  on  March  23,  beyond  stating  that  the  officer  to 
whom  he  is  supposed  to  refer  has  not  been  appointed 
to  any  superior  grade.  She  has  merely  been  lent 
temporarily  to  assist  at  the  Central  Telephone  Ex- 
change in  work  for  which  she  has  special  qualifica- 
tions."! 

On  April  19  and  May  12,  1904,  Mr.  Nannetti  again 
protested  against  the  promotion  of  the  woman  in  ques- 
tion to  the  position  of  first  class  assistant  supervisor, 
saying:  "This  girl  was  appointed  because  she  had 
strong  friends  at  Court.'*  ....  On  the  latter  date 
Mr.  Nannetti  also  intervened  on  behalf  of  a  telegraph- 
ist at  North  Wall,  whose  salary  had  been  reduced 
from  $6  a  week  to  $5,  as  well  as  on  behalf  of  one  Wood, 
who  had  been  retired  on  a  reduced  pension,  by  way 
of  punishment.  The  case  of  Wood,  Mr.  Nannetti  had 
brought  up  in  1903,  when  the  Post  Office  Vote  was 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  23,  1903,  p.  1,464; 
and  May  7,  1903,  p.  27. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       295* 

under  discussion.  For  the  purpose  of  bringing  these 
several  matters  before  the  House,  he  now  moved  the 
reduction  of  the  salary  of  the  Postmaster  General  by 
$500.1 

On  March  16,  1903,  Mr.  Nannetti  asked  whether 
the  statement  of  the  Controller  that  there  was  not  a 
man  qualified  for  promotion  in  the  [Dublin  letter  sort- 
ing] branch  had  had  any  influence  "with  the  Depart- 
ment in  the  filling  of  a  certain  vacancy  in  the  Dublin 
Post  Ofifice."^  That  question  illustrated  a  type  of  in- 
tervention that  suggests  the  possibility  of  Great  Britain 
reaching  the  stage  that  has  been  reached  in  Australia, 
where  Members  of  Parliament  have  been  known  to 
move  reductions  in  the  salaries  of  oflficers  who  had 
offended  the  rank  and  file  by  attempting  to  introduce 
businesslike  methods  and  practices.  If  that  stage  ever 
is  reached,  there  will  be  a  great  multiplication  of  cases 
like  the  following  one.  Before  the  Tweedmouth  Com- 
mittee appeared  Mr.  J.  Shephard,  Chairman  Metro- 
politan Districts  Board  of  Postal  Clerks'  Association, 

to  champion   the  cause  of  Mr.   .     Said   Mr. 

Shephard :  "I  have  it  here  on  his  word  that  his  post- 
master has  recommended  him  for  a  vacant  clerkship 

at  the  District  OfKice.     Mr.   has   served   for 

many  years  under  the  eyes  of  this  postmaster  who 
recommends  him  for  promotion,  and  I  take  it  that  that 
is  full  and  sufificient  evidence  of  Mr.  's  fitness 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  9,  and  May  12,  1904, 
p.  1,239  and  1,246  to  1,268. 

'Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March   16,   1903,  p.  856. 


296  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

to  perform  the  duties  of  the  clerk."  Mr.  J.  C.  Badcock, 
Controller  London  Postal  Service,  testified  in  reply- 
that  he  had  summoned  the  postmaster  in  question,  who 

had  admitted  that  Mr. had  discharged  ''minor 

clerical  duties"  in  a  perfectly  satisfactory  manner,  but 

that  his  recommendation  that  Mr.  should  be 

promoted  to  a  clerkship,  "was  made  more  out  of  sym- 
pathy with  the  man  than  with  any  hope  that  he  would 
be  qualified  to  undertake  the  higher  duties  which  he 
would  have  to  succeed  to  if  appointed  to  a  clerkship."^ 

In  March,  1887,  Mr.  Bradlaugh,  M.  P.,  intervened 
in  the  House  of  Commons  on  behalf  of  two  telegraph 
clerks  at  Liverpool  who  feared  they  were  about  to  be 
M.  P/s  act  in  passed  over  in  favor  "of  a  young  man 
Advance  who  entered  the  Engineering  Depart- 

ment nine  months  ago  as  a  temporary  foreman. "^ 

In  April,  1902,  Captain  Norton  intervened  on  behalf 
of  two  letter  sorters,  R.  H.  Brown  and  H.  Johnson, 
who  feared  they  were  going  to  be  passed  over  in  the 
filling  of  certain  vacancies  among  the  overseers.^  In 
1906,  Captain  Norton  was  made  a  Junior  Lord  of  the 
Treasury  in  the  Campbell-Bannerman  Liberal  Govern- 
ment. 

In  March,  1903,  Mr.  M.  Joyce,  M.  P.  for  Limerick 
as  well  as  an  Alderman,  asked  the  Postmaster  General : 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  the  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897  ;  q.  3,214  and  4,206. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  10,  1887,  p.  i,733. 
'Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  24,  1902,  p.  1,189. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       297 

"Whether  it  is  his  intention  to  promote  a  local  official 
to  the  assistant  superintendentship  now  vacant  at  the 
Limerick  Post  Office,  and,  if  not,  will  he  assign  the 
reason?  ....  May  I  ask  whether  the  duties  of  this 
office  have  not  been  performed  in  the  most  satisfactory 
manner  by  a  local  officer  during  the  absence  of  the 
assistant  superintendent,  and  will  he  give  this  matter 
due  consideration,  as  every  class  of  the  community 
would  be  pleased  at  such  an  appointment."^ 

In  April,  1903,  Mr.  Shehan  asked  the  Postmaster 
General :  "Whether  his  attention  has  been  directed  to 
an  application  from  Dennis  Murphy,  at  present  acting 
as  auxiliary  postman,  for  appointment  to  the  vacant 
position  of  rural  postman  from  Mill  Street  to  Culler, 
County  Cork ;  and  whether,  in  view  of  the  man's  char- 
acter and  qualifications,  he  will  consider  the  advisability 
of  appointing  him  to  the  vacancy?"^ 

In  February,  1903,  Mr.  Nannetti  asked  the  Post- 
master General  "whether  he  is  aware  that  a  telegraphist 
named  Mercer,  of  the  Bristol  Post  Office,  has  applied 
for  160  vacant  postmasterships  since  1894;  whether, 
seeing  that  during  these  periods  clerks  of  less  service, 
experience,  ability  and  salary  have  been  the  recipients 
of  these  positions,  he  will  make  inquiry  into  the  case?"^ 

In  July,  1899,  Mr.  O'Brien,^  M.  P.  for  Kilkenny, 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  9,  1903,  p.  113. 
"Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  7,  1903,  p.   1,242. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  February  24,   1903,  p.  670. 

*  Who's  Who,  1905,  O'Brien,  P.,  M.  P.  since  1886;  mechanical 
and  marine  engineer.  In  1895  Mr.  O'Brien  had  been  elected  to 
Parliament  by  a  majority  of  fourteen  votes. 


298  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

asked  the  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  as  representing 
the  Postmaster  General,  ''whether  he  is  aware  that  a 
postman  named  Jackson,  in  Kilkenny,  has  been  in  the 
Post  Office  service  over  20  years  and  that  his  wages  at 
present  are  only  12s.  per  week;  and  whether  Jackson 
was  given  the  increment  of  is.  6d.  per  week  fixed  by 
the  new  wages  scale  which  came  into  operation  in  April, 
1897;  and  if  not,  whether  he  will  cause  inquiry  to  be 
made  into  the  case,  with  the  view  of  giving  Jackson 
the  wages  to  which  he  is  entitled  by  the  rules  of  the 
service?"  Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary 
to  the  Treasury,  replied :  "The  rural  postman  at  Kil- 
kenny to  whom  the  Honorable  Member  refers  was 
transferred,  on  June  19,  to  another  walk  at  that  place, 
carrying  wages  of  i6s.  a  week.  His  previous  duty 
was  not  sufficient  to  warrant  higher  wages  than  12s.  a 
week."i 

In  April,  1901,  Sir  George  Newnes,  M.  P.  for 
Swansea,  protested  against  the  promotion  out  of  order, 
according  to  seniority,  of  one  A.  E.  Samuel,  a  sorter 
and  telegraphist  at  Swansea.^  Sir  George  Newnes  is 
the  founder  of  George  Newnes,  Limited,  proprietors 
Strand  Magazine,  Tit-Bits,  etc. ;  and  proprietor  of  the 
Westminster  Gazette,  the  London  evening  newspaper 
of  the  Liberal  Party. 

In  February  and  March,  1903,  Mr.  C.  E.  Schwann, 
M.  P.  for  Manchester,  protested  against  the  promotion 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  3,  1899. 
'Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  22,  1901,  p.  9x9. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       299 

out  of  order  of  two  men  at  Manchester,  who  had  been 
respectively  numbers  99  and  133  in  their  class.^  Mr. 
Schwann  is  President  of  the  Manchester  Reform  Qub, 
and  has  been  nine  years  President  of  the  National  Re- 
form Union.  He  has  held  successively  the  offices  of 
Secretary,  Treasurer  and  President  of  the  Manchester 
Liberal  Association.  In  1900  he  was  elected  to  Par- 
liament by  a  majority  of  twenty-six  votes. 

In  July,  1902,  Mr.  Keir  Hardie  asked  the  Financial 
Secretary  to  the  Treasury :  "Whether  the  overseer's 
vacancy  in  the  South  Eastern  Metropolitan  district, 
created  by  the  death  of  Mr.  Feldwick,  and  recently 
filled  by  a  suburban  officer,  will  now  be  restored  to  the 
town  establishment,  seeing  that  the  appointment 
properly  belongs  to  this  establishment?"  Mr.  Austen 
Chamberlain  replied:  "The  vacancy  in  question  has 
been  filled  by  the  transfer  of  an  overseer  from  a  sub- 
urban office  in  the  same  postal  district,  but  the  vacancy 
thus  created  in  the  suburbs  has  been  filled  by  the  pro- 
motion of  an  officer  in  the  town  district  office."  In 
August,  1902,  Mr.  Keir  Hardie  asked  the  Financial 
Secretary  to  the  Treasury :  "Whether  he  is  aware  that 
the  overseer's  vacancy  which  occurred  in  the  town 
establishment  of  the  South  Eastern  Metropolitan  Dis- 
trict by  the  promotion  of  Mr.  May  to  an  inspectorship 
at  another  office,  has  been  filled  by  the  transfer  of  an 
officer  in  the  suburban  establishment,  thus  diverting  a 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  February  25,  1903,  p.  803; 
and  March  9,  1903,  p.  108. 


300  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

town  vacancy  to  the  suburbs;  and  whether,  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  the  chances  of  promotion  in  the  suburban 
estabHshments  are  75  per  cent,  better  than  in  the  town 
estabhshment,  he  will  cause  the  vacancy  to  be  restored 
to  the  establishment  in  which  it  originally  occurred?" 
Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain  replied:  **The  Postmaster 
General  is  aware  of  the  effect  of  the  promotion  in  ques- 
tion, and  has  already  arranged  that  the  balance  of  pro- 
motion shall  be  readjusted  on  an  early  opportunity  by 
the  transfer  of  a  town  [officer]  to  a  suburban  vacancy.^ 
On  March  24,  1905,  Mr.  Charles  Hobhouse,  M.  P. 
for   Bristol,    asked   the   Postmaster    General    "why  a 

.  ,^     ,       ,  ,    number    of    men     with     unblemished 
A  Member  of  the 
Select  Committee  character    and    with    service    ranging 

on  Post  Office     from  1 5  to  25  years  have,  in  the  recent 

^'  promotions  in  the  Bristol  Post  Office, 

been  passed  over  in  favor  of  a  junior  postman?"     In 

1906,  Mr.  Hobhouse  was  made  a  member  of  the  Select 

Committee  on  Post  Office  Servants.^ 

On  March  15,  1906,^  Mr.  Sloan,  M.  P.  for  Belfast, 
intervened  on  behalf  of  the  men  who  had  recently  been 
passed  over  in  the  selection  of  three  men  to  act  as 
"provincial  clerks"  in  the  Post  Office  at  Belfast. 

On  the  same  day,  Mr.  Sloan  asked  the  Postmaster 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  lo,  1902,  p.  1,359;  and 
August  8,  1902,  p.  1,102. 

""  Who's  Who,  1905,  Hobhouse,  C.  E.  H.,  M.  P.  (R.),  East  Bristol 
since  1900;  Recorder  of  Wills  since  1901.  Education:  Eton; 
Christ  Church,  Oxford.  M.  P.  (L),  East  Wilts,  1892-95;  private 
secretary  at  Colonial  Office,  1892-95  ;  County  Alderman,  Wilts,  1893 
to  present  time.     Clubs :  Brooks',  Naval  and  Military. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  15,   1906. 


CURTAILMENT  OF  EXECUTIVE'S  POWER       301 

General  "under  what  circumstances  the  junior  head 
postman  at  Belfast  is  retained  permanently  on  a 
regular  duty  while  his  seniors,  equally  capable  men, 
are  compelled  to  rotate  on  irregular  duties  with  irreg- 
ular hours." 

On  August  2,  1906,  the  Postmaster  General,  Mr. 
Sydney  Buxton,  replied  to  Mr.  Sloan:  "I  cannot  re- 
view cases  of  promotion  decided  by  my  predecessor 
eighteen  months  ago." 

In  1905  Mr.  Sloan  had  voted  for  a  Select  Committee 
on  Postal  Servants'  Grievances. 

The  foregoing  quotations  could  be  extended  indefi- 
nately,  but  they  illustrate  sufficiently  the  several  kinds 
of  intervention  in  matters  of  mere  administrative  de- 
tail, as  well  as  the  high  political  and  social  standing  of 
some  of  the  Members  of  Parliament  who  lend  them- 
selves to  those  several  kinds  of  intervention.  But 
these  quotations  may  not  be  brought  to  an  end  without 
mention  of  the  qualifying  fact  that  Lord  Stanley, 
Postmaster  General  from  1903  to  1905,  repeatedly 
stated  in  the  House  of  Commons  that  he  did  "not  select 
the  senior  men  unless  they  were  best  qualified  to  do  the 
work."i 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  28,  1904,  p.  1,428; 
April  14,  and  May  12,  1904,  p.  1,253. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

MEMBERS'   OF   THE   HOUSE  OF   COMMONS   INTER- 
VENE   ON    BEHALF    OF    PUBLIC    SERVANTS 
WHO    HAVE    BEEN    DISCIPLINED 

Evidence  presented  before:  The  Royal  Commission  appointed 
to  inquire  into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  and  the  Tweed- 
mouth  Committee,  1897.  Instances  of  intervention  by  Members 
of  Parliament.  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Financial  Secretary 
to  the  Treasury,  in  April,  1902,  states  that  at  a  low  estimate 
one-third  of  the  time  of  the  highest  officials  in  the  Post  Office 
is  occupied  with  petty  questions  of  discipline  and  administrative 
detail,  because  of  the  intervention  of  Members  of  Parliament. 
He  adds  that  it  is  "absolutely  deplorable"  that  time  and  energy 
that  should  be  given  to  the  consideration  of  large  questions  must 
be  given  to  matters  that  "in  any  private  business  would  be  dealt 
with  by  the  officer  on  the  spot."  Sir  John  Eldon  Gorst's  testi- 
mony before  the  Committee  on  National  Expenditure,  1902. 

In  1888,  Mr.  Harvey,  a  Member  of  the  Royal  Com- 
mission appointed  to  inquire  into  the  Civil  Establish- 
ments, asked  Sir  S.  A.  Blackwood,  Secretary  to  the 
Post  Office  since  1880:  "Now  I  should  like  to  ask  you 
whether  you  consider  there  is  a  distinct  tend- 
ency among  the  clerical  establishments  [i.  e.,  the  clerks 
above  the  rank  and  file],  especially  the  lower  division 
clerks,  to  develop  what  for  want  of  a  better  term  I  will 
call  trades  union  spirit?'*  "Yes,  I  believe  there  is 
a  good  deal  of  evidence  of  that."     "Have  you,  your- 

302 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE         303 

self,  found  it  difficult  to  deal  with  that;  is  it  a  factor 
in  your  administration  [of  the  Post  Office]  ?"  "Not 
with  regard  to  the  lower  division  clerks  [above  the 
rank  and  file] ;  it  is  with  regard  to  the  subordinate 
ranks  of  the  service,  the  rank  and  file;  amongst  them 
there  is  a  very  strong  tendency  in  that  direction." 
"A  growing  tendency?"  '*It  is  certainly  growing." 
"A  growing  tendency  then  we  may  say  to  introduce 
the  cooperation  of  Members  of  Parliament  to  deal 
M.  P.'s  and  the  with  individual  grievances  ?"  "A  very 
Rank  and  File  strongly  growing  tendency."  At  this 
point  Mr.  Lawson  interrupted:  "Individual  or  class 
grievances?"  "Class  grievances,  but  there  are  a  great 
many  instances  in  which  individual  grievances  are 
brought  forward  [by  Members  of  Parliament]."  "The 
point  of  the  question  was  whether  this  spirit  of  trades 
unionism  was  evoked  for  the  sake  of  bringing  forward 
individual  grievances,  and  you  said  yes;  and  then  I 
asked  whether  it  was  class  grievances  or  individual 
grievances?"  "I  mean  class  grievances,  but  it  is  made 
use  of  in  respect  of  individual  grievances."  Mr. 
Harvey  resumed:  "And  you  think  it  is  growing?" 
"I  think  it  is  strongly  growing."  "So  we  may  say, 
to  repeat  the  question  I  put  just  now,  that  it  makes  a 
factor  in  your  administration  of  the  Post  Office,  and 
you  have  always  to  be  prepared  to  meet  this  growing 
tendency?"  "It  is  continuously  raising  difficulties, 
and  very  serious  ones." 

Mr.  Lawson  queried:  "You  said  something  about 


304  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

trades  unionism;  do  you  think  it  is  possible  by  any 
regulation  to  stop  trades  unionism  of  a  great  class  such 
as  the  senior  division,  or  the  classes  which  are  the  sub- 
ordinate part  of  your  establishment?"  "I  think  it 
would  be  very  difficult."  "You  would  have  to  reckon 
with  that  as  a  permanent  factor  ?"     "Yes."^ 

This  intervention  on  behalf  of  individual  employees 
is  managed  as  follows.  Members  of  Parliament  first 
interview  the  Postmaster  General ;  if  they  fail  to  obtain 
satisfaction,  they  bring  the  grievance  of  their  constit- 
uent before  the  House  of  Commons,  by  means  of  a 
question  addressed  in  the  House  to  the  Postmaster 
General.  It  will  be  remembered  that  Mr.  Hanbury, 
Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  in  1900  stated 
that  he  had  agreed  to  represent  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral in  the  House  of  Commons  only  on  condition  that 
he  should  be  given  full  freedom  to  answer  such  ques- 
tions in  any  way  he  saw  fit,  and  that  he  should  not  be 
bound  by  any  answers  furnished  him  either  by  the 
permanent  officers  of  the  Post  Office  or  by  the  Post- 
master General.  And  that  Sir  H.  H.  Fowler  pro- 
tested against  the  Postmaster  General  sitting  in  the 
House  of  Lords,  on  the  ground  that  the  questions 
asked  by  Members  of  the  House  of  Commons  often 
demanded  to  be  answered  by  a  man  who  had  his  finger 
on  the  pulse  of  the  House,  and  was  able  to  cut  through 
the  red  tape  of  officialism  on  public  grounds,  which 

*  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  Sir  S.  A.  Blackwood,  Secretary 
to  the  Post  Office  since  1880;  q.   17,821  to  17,^27. 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE         305 

meant,  to  set  aside  the  rules  of  the  Department  in 
response  to  the  exigencies  of  poHtical  expediency. 

If  the  answer  given  by  the  Postmaster  General  is 
unsatisfactory,  the  Member  of  Parliament  gives  notice 
that  he  will  bring  the  matter  up  again  on  the  discussion 
of  the  Estimates  of  Expenditure.  In  the  meantime 
he  brings  to  bear,  behind  the  scenes,  what  pressure  he 
can  command.  And  he  often  learns  to  appreciate  the 
grim  humor  of  the  reply  once  given  by  a  former  Min- 
ister of  Railways  in  Victoria,  Australia,  to  a  Victorian 
Royal  Commission,  to  the  query  whether  political  in- 
fluence was  exercised  in  the  administration  of  the  State 
railways  of  Victoria.  The  reply  had  been :  "I  should 
like  to  know  how  you  can  have  a  politician  without 
political  influence?" 

Of  course  not  =^11  cases  of  intervention  by  Members 
of  Parliament  are  as  successful  as  was  the  intervention 
of  Mr.  Bradlaugh,  which  resulted  in  the  promotion  of 
eleven  men  out  of  fourteen  who  had  been  passed  over 
as  "not  qualified  for  promotion,"  or,  as  was  the  inter- 
vention of  the  Member  of  Parliament  whose  name  was 
not  revealed,  which  brought  about  the  revocation  of 
the  promotion  of  the  ablest  man  in  the  Post  Office  at 
Sheffield.  Indeed,  the  principal  effect  of  these  inter- 
ventions is  not  to  force  the  Post  Office  to  retrace  steps 
already  taken,  it  is  to  prevent  the  Post  Office  from  tak- 
ing certain  steps.  These  interventions  modify  the 
entire  administration  of  the  British  Post  Office.  They 
compel  the  Postmaster  General  and  his  leading  officers 


306  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

to  consider  the  political  aspect  of  every  proposal  com- 
ing from  the  local  postmasters,  and  other  intermediate 
officers,  be  it  a  proposal  to  promote,  to  pass  over,  to 
discipline,  or  to  dismiss.  It  was  this  possibility  of 
intervention  by  Members  of  Parliament,  acting  under 
pressure  from  civil  servants'  unions,  that  gave  the  late 
Mr.  Fawcett  **a  perfect  horror  of  passing  over,"  that 
caused  Mr.  Arnold  Morley  "the  greatest  distress" 
whenever  he  had  to  pass  anyone  over,  and  that  led 
Mr.  Raikes  to  state  in  the  House  of  Commons,  that, 
"in  the  interests  of  the  Public  Service,  and  especially 
in  the  interests  of  the  Post  Office  itself,"  he  had  de- 
clined to  follow  the  advice  of  his  officers  that  he  pro- 
mote a  certain  clerk  in  the  Secretary's  Office;  as  well 
as  that  he  made  it  his  practice  to  try  to  mitigate  the 
rules  of  the  Department  governing  punishment  and 
dismissal.  It  was  with  the  thought  of  Parliamentary 
intervention  in  mind,  that  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,* 
Postmaster  General,  said,  in  February,  1903:  "The 
selection  of  officers  for  promotion  is  always  an  invid- 
ious task." 

The  testimony  given  before  the  Tweedmouth  Com- 
mittee, 1897,  contains  a  number  of  incidents  which 
Typical  show  how  leniently  the  Post  Office  De- 

Grievances  partment  is  obliged  to  deal  with  men 

who  violate  the  rules.     These  incidents  were  brought 
before  the  Committee  by  the  representatives  of  the 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  February  25,  1903,  p.  803. 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE         307 

employees  of  the  Post  Office,  for  the  purpose  of 
proving  by  individual  cases,  that  the  Department's 
rulings  were  unduly  severe,  and  afforded  just  cause 
for  grievance. 

One  Webster,  a  letter  carrier  at  Liverpool,  in  July, 
1883,  failed  to  cover  his  whole  walk,  and  brought 
back  to  the  office,  letters  which  he  should  have  deliv- 
ered. These  letters  he  surreptitiously  inserted  among 
the  letters  of  other  carriers.  Mr.  Herbert  Joyce,  Third 
Secretary  to  General  Post  Office,  said  dismissal  would 
not  have  been  harsh  punishment  for  the  offence;  but 
Webster  was  merely  deprived  of  one  good  conduct 
stripe,  worth  25  cents  a  week.  In  1884  and  1885 
Webster's  increment  of  salary  was  arrested  for  unsat- 
isfactory conduct.  In  July,  1886,  Webster  was  re- 
moved from  his  walk,  and  reduced  to  the  "junior  men" 
on  the  "relief  force,"  for  having  been  under  the  influ- 
ence of  drink  while  on  duty.  In  1890,  Webster  com- 
plained to  headquarters  of  harsh  treatment,  stating 
that  though  he  had  served  15  years,  he  had  not  received 
three  good  conduct  stripes.  And  in  1896,  Mr.  J.  S. 
Smith,  the  official  representative  of  the  provincial  post- 
men, deemed  it  expedient  to  cite  the  case  to  the  Tweed- 
mouth  Committee  in  the  course  of  an  argument  to  the 
effect  that  there  was  too  great  a  difference  "between  the 
punishment  meted  out  to  postmen  and  the  punishment 
meted  out  to  sorters ;  not  that  I  say  the  punishment  is 
too  slight  for  sorters,  but  it  is,  I  might  say,  too  severe 
for  postmen,"     It  may  be  added  that,  in  1896,  Web- 


308  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

ster  was  recommended  for  three  good  conduct  stripes, 
though  the  regulation  says  that  a  good  conduct  stripe 
shall  be  awarded  only  for  five  clear  and  consecutive 
years  of  good  conduct.  Non-observance  of  that  regu- 
lation led  the  Tweedmouth  Committee  to  report :  "The 
practice  which  has  grown  up  in  the  Department  of 
awarding  two  stripes  at  the  same  time  to  a  man  whose 
service  exceeds  lo  years,  but  whose  unblemished  serv- 
ice extends  over  only  5  years,  is,  we  think,  a  bad  one, 
and  should  be  discontinued."^ 

The  foregoing  recommendation  of  the  Tweedmouth 
Committee  was  not  endorsed  by  the  Government.  On 
March  13,  1906,  the  Postmaster  General,  Mr.  Sydney 
Buxton,  in  reply  to  Mr.  Thomas  Smyth,  M.  P.,  who 
was  intervening  on  behalf  of  one  Thomas  Reilly,  said : 
*T  find  that  Thomas  Reilly  would  have  been  entitled 
to  an  increase  of  one  shilling  and  six  pence  a  week  in 
his  wages  as  from  April  i,  1905,  if  his  conduct  during 
the  preceding  twelve  months  had  been  satisfactory. 
Unfortunately  the  necessary  certificate  to  that  effect 
could  not  be  given,  but  the  question  of  granting  the 
increase  to  Reilly  will  come  up  again  for  considera- 
tion shortly It  will  be  necessary  to  postpone 

for  a  time  the  award  of  a  second  stripe."^ 

In  October,  1895,  one  Roberts,  an  auxiliary  post- 


*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897,  p.  19;  q.  9,132  and  following,  Mr.  J.  S.  Smith; 
and  q.  12,366,  Mr.  H.  Joyce,  Third  Secretary  to  the  General  Post 
Office. 

"^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  13,  1906. 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE         309 

man  was  warned  that  he  would  be  dismissed  unless 
his  conduct  improved.  He  had  been  reported  for 
"treating  parcel  receptacles  in  a  rough  and  reckless 
manner,  and  smashing  the  parcels."     In   November, 

1895,  he  altered  the  address  on  a  parcel  in  order  to 
save  himself  the  trouble  of  delivering  the  parcel  on 
the  day  on  which  he  made  the  alteration.  The  parcel 
was  given  to  a  carrier  on  another  route,  who  returned 
it  as  not  deliverable.  After  some  delay  the  parcel 
finally  was  delivered  by  Roberts.  When  Mr.  S.  Wal- 
pole,  Secretary  of  the  Post  Office,  heard  this  testimony, 
he  exclaimed:  "And  was  Roberts  dismissed  on  the 
spot?"  Mr.  Badcock,  Controller  London  Postal  Serv- 
ice, replied:  "No.  The  overseer  Hescribed  him  as 
totally  unreliable,  and  he  was  warned  for  the  last  time." 
Mr.  Walpole  continued :  "Why  was  he  not  dismissed  ?" 
Mr.  Badcock  replied :  "Well,  he  ought  to  have  been." 
In  January,  1896,  Roberts  was  again  cautioned;  on 
February  24,  1896,  he  failed  to  attend  his  morning 
duty ;  and  he  was  seriously  cautioned  again.     In  March, 

1896,  he  was  guilty  of  "gross  carelessness,"  and  was 
told  to  look  for  other  employment.  Thereupon  Rob- 
erts wrote  his  postmaster  that  he  was  a  member  of  the 
Postmen's  Federation.  Shortly  afterward,  Mr. 
Churchfield,  Secretary  of  the  Postmen's  Federation, 
brought  Roberts*  case  before  the  Tweedmouth  Com- 
mittee, alleging  that  the  Post  Office  Department  had 
dismissed  Roberts  because  he  had  supplied  evidence 
to  the  representatives  of  the  postal  employees  who 


310  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

had  appeared  before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee.^ 
In  1878,  one  Woodhouse,  a  postman  at  Norwich, 
was  suspended  for  two  days  for  irregular  attendance, 
having  been  late  42  times  in  three  months.  In  1880, 
he  was  suspended  for  three  days,  having  been  late  173 
times  during  the  year.  Woodhouse  also  had  been  very 
troublesome  to  the  inspector,  setting  a  bad  example  to 
the  younger  men.  In  1882,  he  was  absent  from  duty 
because  of  intoxication,  was  grossly  insubordinate  to 
the  local  postmaster,  whom  he  set  at  defiance,  and  also 
grossly  insubordinate  to  the  surveyor.  The  local  post- 
master recommended  that  he  be  dismissed.  "At  head- 
quarters, however,  with  a  large,  and  some  people  think 
a  very  undue,  leniency,  it  was  decided  to  give  him  one 
more  trial."  In  1889,  Woodhouse  was  cautioned  by 
the  postmaster  for  insubordinate  conduct  to  the  in- 
spector. In  1 89 1  and  1892,  the  postmaster  refused 
to  recommend  him  for  good  conduct  stripes.  In  1894 
there  was  a  marked  improvement  in  Woodhouse's  con- 
duct. The  improvement  was  maintained,  and  in  1896,. 
Woodhouse  was  recommended  for  good  conduct 
stripes.  Of  this  man,  Mr.  J.  S.  Smith,  the  official 
representative  of  the  provincial  postmen,  said,  in  1896,^ 
before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee :  "The  last  17  or  18 
years  of  Woodhouse's  career  have  been  of  a  most 
exemplary  description,  a  good  time-keeper  and  zeal- 

^  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897  ;  Mr.  Churchfield,  Secretary  Postmen's  Federa- 
tion;  q.  10,994  and  following;  and  Mr.  J.  C.  Badcock,  Controller 
London  Postal  Service;  q.  11,585  to  11,589. 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE         311 

ous  in  the  discharge  of  his  duties,  and  yet,  though  he 
had  been  a  postman  for  25  years,  he  has  never  been  the 
recipient  of  a  good  conduct  stripe.  By  this  means  he 
has  been  deprived  of  about  $450,  truly  a  great  loss  for 
a  postman  to  suffer  through  having  this  vast  sum 
deducted  from  his  wages.  It  needs  no  words  of  mine 
to  point  out  the  great  injustice  that  has  been  inflicted 
upon  Woodhouse.  Any  little  irregularity  that  may 
have  occurred  (such  as  bad  time-keeping,  which  is  ad- 
mitted) in  the  first  7  or  8  years  of  his  service,  has  been 
amply  atoned  for  by  17  or  18  years'  punctuality  and 
excellent  behavior."^ 

In  November,  1895,  a  letter  carrier  at  Manchester 
came  "under  the  influence  of  drink,"  and  reached  at 
3.50  p.  m.  a  point  in  his  walk  which  he  should  have 
reached  at  2.30  p.  m.  "On  the  following  day  he  was 
again  under  the  influence  of  drink  and  unfit  to  make 
his  delivery."  The  punishment  was  the  deprivation 
of  one  good  conduct  stripe.^ 

In  December,  1895,  a  postman  at  Newcastle,  while 
off  duty,  but  in  uniform,  "was  reeling  along  [one  of 
the  principal  streets]  intoxicated  at  3  p.  m."  The  case 
was  sent  up  to  the  Postmaster  General,  who  decided 
that  the  man  should  lose  one  good  conduct  stripe.  Mr. 
Spencer  Walpole,  a  member  of  the  Tweedmouth  Com- 

^  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OfUce 
Establishments,  1897;  Mr.  H.  Joyce,  Third  Secretary  to  General 
Post  Office;  q.  12,316;  and  Mr.  J.  S.  Smith;  q.  9,063. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897;  Mr.  H.  Joyce,  Third  Secretary  General  Post 
Office;  q.  12,374;  and  Mr.  J.  S.  Smith;  q.  9,iiS« 


312  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

mittee,  and  the  Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office, 
said  dismissal  would  not  have  been  too  severe  a  punish- 
ment ;  and  Mr.  H.  Joyce,  Third  Secretary  General  Post 
Office,  London,  assented  to  the  statement.^ 

Mr.  Badcock,  Controller  London  Postal  Service,  in 
replying  to  the  testimony  of  Mr.  A.  F.  Harris,  the 
official  representative  of  the  London  postmen,  said  that 
it  was  true  that  while  one  Worth  for  some  years  past 
had  off  and  on  been  made  an  acting  head  postman,  he 
had  not  been  recommended  for  promotion  to  the  posi- 
tion of  head  postman,  because  his  postmaster  had  re- 
ported that  he  was  "shifty,  unreliable,  and  careless." 
Mr.  Walpole,  Secretary  of  the  Post  Office,  thereupon 
queried :  "Is  that  not  a  reason  for  not  employing  him 
to  act  as  head  postman?"  Mr.  Badcock  repHed:  "It 
was  thought  better  to  give  him  a  chance,  instead  of 
letting  him  have  the  grievance  of  complaining  that  he 
had  not  had  an  opportunity  of  showing  whether  he 
was  qualified."  Mr.  Walpole  continued:  "But  if  he 
showed  himself  shifty,  unreliable,  and  careless  for 
several  years,  ought  not  his  trial  as  a  head  postman  to 
cease?"  Mr.  Badcock  replied:  "I  must  confess  that  I 
think  so."" 


^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OfUce 
Establishments,  1897 ;  Mr.  H.  Joyce,  Third  Secretary  General  Post 
Office;  q.  12,356  to  12,360;  and  Mr.  J.  S.  Smith,  representative  of 
the  provincial  postmen;  q.  9,108. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  11,485  and  following,  and  9,187  and  fol- 
lowing. 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE        313 

In  February,  1887,  M^"-  Marum  intervened  in  the 
House  of  Commons  on  behalf  of  one  Ward,  a  teleg- 
raphist, who  had  been  dismissed  in  1876  because  he 
had  discharged  his  duties  unsatisfactorily.* 

In  February,  1888,  Mr.  Lawson,  a  Member  of  the 
Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire  into  the  Civil 
Establishments,  intervened  on  behalf  of  one  Harvey, 
a  letter  carrier  who  had  been  dismissed  in  1882.^ 

In  March,  1901,  Mr.  Bartley^  intervened  on  behalf 
of  one  Canless,  who  had  been  dismissed  because  the 
Postmaster  General  "was  of  the  opinion  that  Mr.  Can- 
less  was  not  a  fit  person  to  be  retained  in  the  service." 
On  dismissing  the  man,  the  Post  Office  had  deducted 
from  his  pay  the  value  of  a  postal  money  order — $2.25 
— alleged  to  have  been  stolen  by  him.*  Canless'  case 
was  brought  up  again  in  August,  1904,  upon  the  occa- 
sion of  the  debate  upon  the  Report  of  the  Bradford 
Committee. 

In  July,  1897,  Mr.  C.  Seale-Hayne  intervened  on 
behalf  of  one  J.  C.  Kinsman,  dismissed  for  insubor- 
dination and  delegation  of  his  duties  to  unauthorized 
persons.^ 

In  August,  1903,  Mr.  Sloan,  M.  P.  for  Belfast,  in- 

^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  February  14,  1887,  p.   1,399. 

'Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  February   24,   i888,  p.   1,375. 

^IVho's  Who.  1905,  Bartley,  Sir  G.  C.  T.,  K.  C.  B.,  cr.  1902; 
M.  P.  North  Islington  since  1885  ;  Assistant  Director  of  Science 
Division  of  Science  and  Art  Department  till  1880  ;  resigned  to  stand 
for  Parliament ;  established  National  Penny  Bank  to  promote  thrift, 
1875. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  15,  1901,  p.  84. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  27,  1897,  p.  1,221. 


314  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

tervened  on  behalf  of  one  Templeton,  of  the  Belfast 
Post  Office,  dismissed  for  emptying  ink  on  the  head  of 
a  workman  engaged  in  the  Post  Office.^ 

In  March,  1905,  Mr.  John  Campbell,  M.  P.,  tried 
to  induce  the  Postmaster  General  to  reopen  the  case 
of  one  M'Cusker,  who  had  been  disciplined  in  1897.^ 

In  April,  1899,  Mr.  Lenty  asked  for  a  pension  for 
one  Wright,  whose  "conduct  had  been  such  as  to  render 
him  unfit  for  further  employment  in  the  public  serv- 
ice."^ 

In  August,  1902,  Mr.  Crean  asked  for  a  pension  for 
W.  H.  Allshire,  "Who  was  reported  for  certain  irreg- 
ularities for  which  he  would  probably  have  been  dis- 
missed. While  the  matter  was  under  consideration 
he  sent  in  his  resignation,  which  was  accepted."* 

In  August,  1903,  Mr.  L.  Sinclair  intervened  on 
behalf  of  B.  J.  Foreman,  "who  was  not  qualified  for 
the  award  of  a  pension,  as  he  was  neither  60  years  of 
age  nor  incapacitated  from  the  performance  of  his 
duty"  when  his  service  was  terminated.*^ 

In  March,  1891,  Earl  Compton  intervened  on  behalf 
of  a  first  class  sorter  who  had  been  reduced  to  the 
second  class  after  having  been  sentenced  to  a  fine  by  a 
Police  Magistrate.® 

In   December,    1893,    Mr.    Keir-Hardie   asked    the 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  13,  i903>  P-  i»i6o. 
''Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  9,  1905,  p.  397. 
'Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  27,  1899,  p.  711. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  i,  1902,  p.  395. 
'^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  August  5,  1903,  p.   1,528. 

*  Hansard's  Parliam,entary  Debates,  March  13,  1891. 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE         315 

Postmaster  General  to  modify  the  rules  governing 
fines  for  being  late  at  duty.  In  February,  1899,  Mr. 
Maddison  made  a  similar  request.^ 

In  October,  1902,  Mr.  Palmer  intervened  on  behalf 
of  some  "learners"  at  Reading,  v^ho  had  been  pun- 
ished "for  careless  performance  of  their  duties,  leading 
to  serious  delay  in  the  delivery  of  telegrams."^  Mr. 
Palmer,  a  biscuit  manufacturer,  was  the  Member  for 
Reading.  In  the  past  he  had  been  an  Alderman  as 
well  as  the  Mayor  of  Reading. 

In  July,  1 90 1,  Mr.  Groves  intervened  on  behalf  of  a 
postman  at  Manchester  from  whom  annual  increments 
of  pay  had  been  withheld  under  the  rules  governing 
irregular  attendance.^  Mr.  Groves  is  Chairman  of 
the  South  Salford  Conservative  Association. 

In  April,  1900,  Mr.  Steadman  said:  "I  honestly 
admit  that  this  question  business  might  be  overdone; 
but  at  the  same  time,  if  anyone,  postman  or  anyone 
else,  thinks  I  can  do  his  case  any  good  by  putting  down 
a  question,  I  shall  always  do  so  as  long  as  I  am  a 
Member  of  this  House."  Mr.  Steadman  proved  as 
good  as  his  boast;  and  in  July,  1900,  he  intervened  on 
behalf  of  a  man  from  whom  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment had  withheld  two  good  conduct  stripes  "because 
he  had  absented  himself  frequently  on  insufficient  plea 
of  illness."     Mr.  Steadman  stood  ready  to  shield  any 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  December  7,  1893,  p.  633; 
and  February  24,  1899,  p.  443. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  October  27,  1902,  p.  797. 
'Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  18,  1901,  p.  840. 


316  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

malingerer  who  might  apply  to  him,  though  malinger- 
ing is  a  serious  evil  in  the  Post  Office  service.  For 
example,  in  1901  the  average  number  of  days'  absence 
on  sick-leave  was  y.d  days  for  the  men  in  that  part  of 
the  staff  that  receives  full  pay  during  sick-leave,  as 
against  5.2  days  for  the  men  in  that  part  of  the  staff 
that  receives  only  half-pay  during  sick-leave.^  Mr. 
Steadman  had  been  elected  to  Parliament  by  a  majority 
of  20  votes.  He  is  at  present  a  Member  of  the  London 
County  Council.^ 

In  June,  1906,  Mr.  Sydney  Buxton,  who  had  be- 
come Postmaster  General,  upon  the  formation  of  the 
Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman  Ministry,  in  Decem- 
ber, 1905,  expressed  himself  as  follows:^  "He  was 
informed  a  little  while  ago  by  his  private  secretary  that 
in  the  ordinary  way  60  or  70  applications  of  various 
sorts  were  made  by  honorable  Members  in  the  course 
of  a  calendar  month,  but  that  for  some  months  past,  in 
consequence  perhaps  of  there  being  a  new  Government, 
a  new  Parliament,  new  Members,  and  a  new  Post- 
master General,  the  number  of  applications  of  all  sorts 
had  amounted  to  between  300  and  400  per  month." 

In  May,  1906,  Mr.  J.  Ward,  a  Member  of  the  Select 
Committee  on  Post  Office  Servants,  1906,  asked  the 
Postmaster  General  "whether  his  attention  had  been 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  27,  1900,  p.  206; 
July  23,  p.  1,468;  and  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Postmaster  General, 
April  30,  1903,  pp.  1,024  and  1,035. 

'Who's  Who,  1905. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  21,  1906,  p.  397. 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE         317 

called  to  the  dismissal  of  E.  C.  Feasey,  of  Walsall, 
who  had  been  an  efficient  officer  in  the  postal  service 

for  17  years and  whether  he 

A  Member  of  the 

Select  Committee  Will    reconsider    the    question    of   the 

on  Post  OfUce  man's  reinstatement?"  Mr.  Buxton  re- 
Servants,  1906        ^jj^^  .  ,.j  ^^^^  ^^^^^^  .^^^^  ^^^  ^j^^^^_ 

Stances  connected  with  the  dismissal  by  my  predecessor 
of  E.  C.  Feasey,  formerly  a  town  postman  at  Walsall. 
I  find  that  Feasey  had  a  most  unsatisfactory  record. . . . 
I  am  not  prepared  to  consider  the  question  of  rein- 
statement/'^ 

In  March,  1906,  the  Postmaster  General,  in  reply  to 
Mr.  Nannetti,  M.  P.,  said:  "The  Reports  and  state- 
ments in  the  Corcoran  case  were  fully  considered  at 
the  time  [1901],  and  I  can  see  no  good  purpose  in 
reopening  the  matter  after  a  lapse  of  five  years."^ 

In  April,  1906,  Mr.  Wiles,^  M.  P.,  intervened  on 
behalf  of  the  head  messenger  in  the  Secretary's  Office 
at  the  General  Post  Office,  London.  Under  the  ad- 
ministration of  Lord  Stanley,  Postmaster  General,  an 
allowance  of  4  shillings  a  week  given  the  head  mes- 
senger at  the  time  of  his  appointment,  had  been  with- 
held from  October,  1900,  to  October,  1905.  Mr. 
Sydney  Buxton  replied :  "I  have  already  had  this  case 
under  my  consideration.  The  allowance  of  4  shillings 
a  week  is  being  granted,  but  unfortunately  the  allow- 
ance cannot  be  made  retrospective." 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  May  21,  1906,  p.  938. 
*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  20,  1906,  p.  198. 
^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  5,   1906,  p.  705. 


gl8  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Mr.  Wiles  had  been  elected  to  Parliament  in  Jan- 
uary, 1906,  having  defeated  Sir  Albert  K.  Rollit,  who, 
for  many  years,  had  made  a  specialty  of  championing 
the  cause  of  Post  Office  employees  who  had  a  griev- 
ance. 

In  April,  1902,  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Financial 
Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  and  representative  in  the 
House  of  Commons  of  the  Postmaster  General,  the 
Marquis  of  Londonderry,  said :  "In  a  great  administra- 
tion like  this  there  must  be  decentralization,  and  how 
difficult  it  is  to  decentralize,  either  in  the  Post  Office 

Deplorable  Waste  ^^  ^"  ^^^  ^™y'  ^^^^  working  under 
of  Executive         constant  examination  by  question  and 
'^  answer   in   this   House,    no   honorable 

Member  who  has  not  had  experience  of  official  life 
can  easily  realize.  But  there  must  be  decentralization, 
because  every  little  petty  matter  cannot  be  dealt  with 
by  the  Postmaster  General  or  the  Permanent  Secretary 
to  the  Post  Office.  Their  attention  should  be  reserved 
in  the  main  for  large  questions,  and  I  think  it  is  de- 
plorable, absolutely  deplorable,  that  so  much  of  their 
time  should  be  occupied,  as  under  the  present  circum- 
stances it  necessarily  is  occupied,  with  matters  of  very 
small  detail,  because  these  matters  of  detail  are  asked 
by  honorable  Members,  and  because  we  do  not  feel  an 
honorable  Member  will  accept  an  answer  from  anyone 
but  the  highest  authority.  I  think  a  third  of  the  time 
'—I  am  putting  it  at  a  low  estimate — of  the  highest 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE         319 

officials  in  the  Post  Office  is  occupied  in  answering 
questions  raised  by  Members  of  this  House,  and  in 
providing  me  with  information  in  order  that  I  may  be 
in  a  position  to  answer  the  inquiries  addressed  to  me" 
concerning  matters  which,  "in  any  private  business, 
would  be  dealt  with  by  the  officer  on  the  spot,  without 
appeal  or  consideration  unless  grievous  cause  were 
shown.  "^ 

In  March,  1903,  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Post- 
master General,  read  the  following  Post  Office  Rule: 
"A  postmaster  is  to  address  to  his  surveyor,  and  a  sub- 
ordinate officer  is  to  address  to  the  postmaster  (who 
will  forward  it  to  his  surveyor),  any  application  from 
himself  having  reference  to  his  duties  or  pay,  or  any 
communications  he  may  desire  to  make  relating  to 
official  matters ;  and  if  the  applicant  is  dissatisfied  with 
the  result  he  may  appeal  direct  to  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral. But  it  is  strictly  forbidden  to  make  any  such 
application  or  other  communication  through  the  public, 
or  to  procure  one  to  be  made  by  Members  of  Parlia- 
ment, or  others ;  and  should  an  irregular  application  be 
received,  the  officer  on  whose  behalf  it  is  made  will  be 
subject  to  censure  or  punishment  proportionate  to  the 
extent  of  his  participation  in  the  violation  of  the  rule." 
Mr.  Chamberlain  added :  "But  it  has  been  my  practice 
[as  well  as  that  of  Mr.  Chamberlain's  predecessors] 
to  treat  the  rule  as  applying  only  to  applications  so 
made  in  the  first  instance,  and  I  have  raised  no  objec- 

^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  2,  1902, 


320  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

tion  to  an  officer  who  had  appealed  to  me,  and  was 
dissatisfied  with  my  decision,  applying  subsequently  to 
a  Member  of  Parliament."^ 

The  Post  Office  is  not  the  only  British  Department 
of  State  which  is  obliged  to  consider  with  care  how 
far  it  may  go  counter  to  individual  interests  in  enforc- 
ing rules  and  standards  adopted  for  the  preservation  of 
the  public  interest. 

Before  the  Select  Committee  on  National  Expendi- 
ture, 1902,  Sir  John  Eldon  Gorst,  M.  P.,  and  Vice- 
President  of  the  Committee  of  Council  on  Education, 
1895  to  1902,  said :  ''What  I  want  to  impress  upon  the 
Committee  is  that  Parliament  has  never  an  influence 
which  goes  for  economy  of  any  kind  in  the  expendi- 
ture of  public  money  on  education  [about  $40,000,000 
a  year].  Then  I  hope  I  have  now  shown  the  Com- 
mittee that  the  only  security  the  public  has  that  what 
it  spends  will  be  efficiently  spent  is  the  system  of  in- 
spection. Earlier  in  my  evidence  I  also  pointed  out 
the  two  systems  which  are  in  vogue  for  inspection, 
namely  the  South  Kensington  system  and  the  White- 
hall system.  The  Whitehall  system,  which  deals  with 
the  larger  amount  of  public  money,  is  extremely  in- 
efficient. The  Elementary  Education  Inspectors  have 
before  their  eyes  the  fear,  first  of  all,  of  the  managers 
of  the  schools  which  they  visit.  The  managers  of  the 
schools  are  often  important  School  Boards  like  the 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  12,  1903,  P-  564. 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOUSE  INTERVENE         321 

School  Board  of  London,  which  is  not  a  body  to  be 
trifled  with,  which  has  very  great  influence,  both  in 
ParHament  and  in  the  Education  Department,  and 
which  the  Inspectors  are  very  much  afraid  of  offend- 
ing. But  it  is  not  only  powerful  School  Boards,  but 
any  managers  [of  schools]  can  take  the  matter  up.  If 
an  Inspector  goes  into  a  school  and  sees  [reports]  that 
the  children  are  dirty,  or  that  the  school  is  dirty,  or 
that  the  teacher  is  inefficient,  the  manager  is  up  in 
arms  at  once,  artd  writes  a  letter  to  the  Board  of  Edu- 
cation, and  comes  up  and  sees  the  Secretary,  and  pro- 
tests against  the  Inspector  for  having  dared  to  make 
an  unfavorable  report  of  his  or  her  school.  Besides 
that,  the  Inspectors  have  before  their  eyes  the  fear  of 
the  National  Union  of  Teachers.  Almost  every 
teacher  now  is  a  member  of  the  National  Union  of 
Teachers,  and  if  an  Inspector  is  supposed  to  be  severe, 
a  teacher  complains  at  once  to  the  National  Union,  and 
the  case  is  taken  up,  possibly  even  in  Parliament,  by 
some  of  the  officials  of  the  National  Union  of  Teachers 
in  Parliament,  and  it  is  made  very  uncomfortable  for 
the  Inspector.  Then,  lastly,  they  [i.  c,  the  Inspectors] 
have  the  office — that  is  not,  say,  their  own  Chief  In- 
spector, but  the  officials  of  the  office,  who  do  not  like 
an  Inspector  who  makes  trouble.  The  great  art  of  an 
Inspector  is  to  get  on  well  with  the  managers  [of 
schools]  and  teachers,  and  to  make  no  trouble  at  all. 
I  have  known  cases  of  adverse  reports  which  were  not 
liked  at  the  office  being  sent  back  to  the  Inspector  to 

21 


322  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

alter,"  not  by  the  Chief  Inspector,  or  Senior  Inspector 
of  the  District,  but  by  some  other  person  in  the  office.^ 

Sir  John  Eldon  Gorst'was  Sohcitor-General  in  1885- 
86,  Under  Secretary  for  India  in  1886  to  1891,  Finan- 
cial Secretary  to  the  Treasury  in  1891-92,  Deputy 
Chairman  of  Committees  of  the  House  of  Commons 
in  1888  to  1 89 1,  and  Vice-President  of  Council  on 
Education  in  1885  to  1902.  He  was  a  Member  of  the 
House  of  Commons  in  1866  to  1868,  and  has  been  a 
member  continuously  since  1875.  Since  1892  he  has 
sat  as  representative  of  the  University  of  Cambridge. 

Sir  John  Eldon  Gorst  was  by  no  means  unwilling  to 
take  his  share  of  blame  for  the  mismanagement  in  the 
various  Departments  of  State  arising  out  of  the  inter- 
vention of  the  House  of  Commons — under  pressure 
from  the  constituencies,  or  organized  groups  in  the 
constituencies — in  the  administrative  details  of  the 
Departments  of  State.  He  said :  "I  have  been  as  great 
a  sinner  as  anyone  in  the  days  when  I  represented 
Chatham,^  before  I  was  a  Member  of  the  Government ; 
I  was  perpetually  urging  the  Secretary  of  the  Admir- 
alty for  the  time  being  to  increase  the  expenditures  at 
the  dockyards"^  [in  the  interest  of  the  laborers  in  the 
dockyards  and  of  the  merchants  and  manufacturers 
who  have  raw  materials  to  sell  to  the  dockyards]. 

'^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  National  Expenditure, 
1902 ;  q.  2,430  et  passim. 

'  1875  to  1885. 

*  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  oh  National  Expenditure, 
S902;  q.  a,502. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

THE    SPIRIT    OF    THE    CIVIL    SERVICE 

The  doctrine  of  an  "implied  contract"  between  the  State  and 
each  civil  servant,  to  the  effect  that  the  State  may  make  no 
change  in  the  manner  of  administering  its  great  trading  depart- 
ments without  compensating  every  civil  servant  however  re- 
motely or  indirectly  affected.  The  hours  of  work  may  not  be 
increased  without  compensating  every  one  affected.  Adminis- 
trative "mistakes"  may  not  be  corrected  without  compensating 
the  past  beneficiaries  of  such  mistakes.  Violation  of  the  order 
that  promotion  must  not  be  mechanical,  or  by  seniority  alone, 
may  not  be  corrected  without  compensating  those  civil  servants 
who  would  have  been  benefitted  by  the  continued  violation  of  the 
aforesaid  order.  The  State  may  not  demand  increased  efficiency 
of  its  servants  without  compensating  every  one  affected.  Persons 
filling  positions  for  which  there  is  no  further  need,  must  be 
compensated.  Each  civil  servant  has  a  "vested  right"  to  the 
maintenance  of  such  rate  of  promotion  as  obtains  when  he  enters 
the  service,  irrespective  of  the  volume  of  business  or  of  any 
diminution  in  the  number  of  higher  posts  consequent  upon  ad- 
ministrative reforms.  The  telegraph  clerks  demand  that  their 
chances  of  promotion  be  made  as  good  as  those  of  the  postal 
clerks  proper,  but  they  refuse  to  avail  themselves  of  the  oppor- 
tunity to  pass  over  to  the  postal  side  proper  of  the  service,  on 
the  ground  that  the  postal  duties  proper  are  more  irksome  than 
the  telegraph  duties.  Members  of  Parliament  support  recalci- 
trant telegraph  clerks  whom  the  Government  is  attempting  to 
force  to  learn  to  perform  postal  duties,  in  order  that  it  may  reap 
advantage  from  having  combined  the  postal  service  and  the 
telegraph  service  in  1870.  Special  allowances  may  not  be  discon- 
tinued; and  vacations  may  not  be  shortened,  without  safeguard- 
ing all  "vested  interests."  Further  illustrations  of  the  hopelessly 
unbusinesslike  spirit  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  public  servants. 


324  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Upon  a  preceding  page  has  been  mentioned  the  con- 
tention of  the  civil  servants  that  there  is  an  impHed 
contract  between  the  State  and  the  Civil  Service  that 
the  conditions  of  employment  obtaining  at  any  moment 
shall  not  be  changed  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  civil 
servants,  except  upon  payment  of  compensation  to  all 
persons  disadvantageous^  affected;  and  that  unless 
such  compensation  is  paid,  any  change  in  the  condi- 
tions and  terms  of  employment  must  be  limited  to 
future  entrants  upon  the  service  of  the  State,  or  to 
persons  who  shall  accept  promotion  on  the  express 
condition  of  becoming  subject  to  the  altered  terms  of 
employment. 

Before  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Ex- 
penditure, 1873,  Mr.  W.  E.  Baxter,  Financial  Secre- 
tary to  the  Treasury,  said :  "I  am  not  an  advocate  for 

Implied  Contract  ^^"^  ^^^^^ '  ^"^  ^^  ^^^  mercantile  busi- 
for  Six  Hour  ness  with  which  I  am  connected,  I  have 
^^^  years  ago  reduced  the  hours  both  of  the 

clerks  and  of  the  workmen,  but  I  am  inclined  to  think 
the  six  hours  given  to  their  work  by  the  Government 
officials  [that  is,  Upper  and  Lower  Division  clerks], 
rather  too  short  a  period,  and  that  it  might  with  ad- 
vantage be  somewhat  lengthened.  At  the  same  time 
we  must  always  keep  in  mind  that  the  effect  of  length- 
ening the  hours  would  be  to  cause  an  immediate  de- 
mand for  an  increase  of  pay.  However  I  have  a  very 
strong  impression  that  in  most  of  the  Government 
offices  there  are  too  many  clerks,  and  that  there  might 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  325 

be  considerable  economy  in  a  reduction  of  numbers 
and  an  increase  of  hours." 

The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  stated  to  the  Com- 
mittee that  it  would  be  inexpedient  to  try  to  raise  the 
hours  of  clerks  from  6  hours  to,  say,  7  hours.  He  said : 
"I  suspect  that  my  one-seventh  more  time  would  be 
more  than  compensated  by  my  having  to  pay  them  a 
great  deal  more  than  one-seventh  more  salary;  and  I 
think  it  would  be  very  perilous  to  take  up  the  flood- 
gates in  that  way."^ 

Before  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888,  Sir  Reginald  E. 
Welby,  Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  stated 
that  he  was  in  favor  of  extending  the  hours  of  the 
Upper  and  Lower  Division  clerks  from  6  hours  to  7. 
The  Chairman  queried :  "But  can  it  be  done  with  exist- 
ing clerks  without  a  breach  of  faith  ?"  Sir  R.  E.  Wel- 
by replied :  "With  regard  to  Lower  Division  clerks,  it 
is  provided  that  in  consideration  of  an  extra  payment, 
which  is  according  to  the  regulation,  a  6  hour  office 
can  be  turned  into  a  7  hour  office There  is  no  pro- 
vision of  that  kind  for  the  Upper  Division,  and,  of 
course,  any  change  would  have  to  be  made  a  matter  of 

consideration The  arrangement  made  between  the 

authorities  of  the  Inland  Revenue  and  the  Treasury, 
in  those  departments  of  the  Inland  Revenue  which  have 
adopted  the  7  hours  system,  has  been  that  the  clerks 

*  Third  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Ex- 
penditure, 1873;  q-  4j641   and  4,418. 


326  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

who  were  under  no  stipulation  to  do  7  hours'  work, 
should  have  an  extra  allowance  until  promotion.  As 
soon  as  they  are  promoted  to  another  class,  we  have 
assumed  that  we  have  the  right  to  put  our  conditions 
upon  the  promotion,  and,  therefore,  from  that  time 
they  fall  into  the  ordinary  scale  of  salary  without  addi- 
tion." At  this  point  Mr.  H.  H.  Fowler,  a  Member  of 
the  Commission,  queried:  "I  understand  you  to  say 
there  is  no  provision  made  for  altering  the  period  of 
service  of  an  Upper  Division  clerk  from  6  hours  to  7 
hours.  I  want  to  know  where  is  the  document  by 
which  the  State  binds  itself  over  to  accept  6  hours' 
work  ?"....  "Nowhere.  The  only  thing  is  that  when  he 
enters  the  office  he  is  told  that  the  hours  are  from  10  to 
4,  or  from  11  to  5."  Mr.  Fowler  continued :  "I  con- 
sider this  is  a  question  of  vital  importance,  and  I  want 
to  have  it  very  distinctly  from  you :  I  want  to  know 
where  is  the  contract  between  the  State  and  any  Upper 
Division  clerk  in  any  department,  that  he  is  only  to 
work  6  hours  a  day?"  "There  is  no  such  document 
that  I  know  of,  and  no  such  understanding  further 
than  the  statement  upon  his  entering  the  office  that 
the  hours  are  such  and  such."  "But  I  want  to  ascer- 
tain whether  there  would  be  even  an  approach  to  a 
breach  of  faith  (if  such  a  term  may  be  used)  if  the 
State  says :  *We  insist  upon  our  servants  working  for 
us  7  hours  a  day  ?' "  "None  in  my  mind,  and  I  may 
add  that  it  is  generally  known  that  the  hours  are  so 
and  so,  but  longer  hours  when  required"  [on  excep- 
tionally busy  days] . 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  327 

To  Sir  T.  H.  Farrer,  Permanent  Secretary  to  the 
Board  of  Trade,  1867  to  1886,  the  Chairman  of  the 
Royal  Commissoin  said :  "What  is  your  view  with 
reference  to  its  being  fair  or  necessary  to  increase  the 
pay  if  seven  hours'  work  be  asked  from  an  Upper  Di- 
vision clerk.  Do  you  think  there  is  any  contract  to 
do  only  6  hours'  work?"  "No,  there  is  no  contract 
whatever;  theoretically  the  rule  is  that  civil  servants 
are  to  do  the  business  that  is  required  of  them.  The 
practical  difficulty  remains  that  if  you  do  it  you  may 
have  a  great  uproar.  You  may  cause  discontent,  and 
you  may  have,  as  I  said  before,  pressure  in  the  House 
of  Commons;  but  theoretically,  and  as  a  matter  of 
right,  I  can  see  no  reason  why  every  officer  should  not 
be  obliged  to  give  7  hours  for  the  existing  pay." 
"Have  you  not  to  some  extent  recognized  it^  by  creat- 
ing a  different  scale  of  pay  in  the  Lower  Division  for 
7  hours  than  for  6  hours?"  "Yes,  you  have,  and  I  am 
very  sorry  for  it ;  when  I  say  you  have,  I  was  a  party 
to  it,2  but  I  am  sorry  that  we  did  it."  "But  you  are 
of  course  of  opinion  that  when  you  announce  that  the 
office  hours  are  from  10  to  4,  it  means  that  these  are 
the  hours  of  public  attendance,  but  that  it  does  not  in 
any  way  prevent  the  head  of  the  office  from  asking  the 
clerks  to  stop  until  the  work  is  done  ?"  "No ;  but  the 
larger  your  class  of  Lower  Division  clerks,  the  more 


*  That  is,  the  claim  to  additional  pay  for  seven  hours'  work. 
^  That    is,    the    Civil    Service    Inquiry    Commission,    1875-76,    of 
which  Sir  T.  H.  Farrer  was  a  member. 


328  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

you  will  find  that  the  hours  become  fixed  hours,  and  if 
they  are  asked  to  attend  beyond  them  [because  of  un- 
usual pressure  of  work],  they  will  ask  for  extra  pay 
for  attendance."^ 

In  1 88 1,  Mr.  Fawcett,  Postmaster  General,  created 

for  the  provincial  towns  the  class  of  "telegraph  clerks," 

who  are  recruited  from  the  first  class  of  telegraphists, 

and  act  as  assistants  to  the  assistant  superintendents. 

Since  the  men  in  question  were  styled  clerks,  they  im- 

^,    ,  ^,    ,    mediately  contended   that  their  hours 

Clerks  are  Clerks 

of   work   should   be   reduced   from   8 

hours  a  day  to  39  hours  a  week,  the  hours  of  the  clerks 
proper.  The  Department  always  has  refused  to  recog- 
nize that  claim.  But  Mr.  Beaufort,  Postmaster  at 
Manchester,  acting  on  a  misreading  of  the  rules,  from 
1884  to  1890  granted  the  telegraph  clerks  at  Manches- 
ter the  39  hours  a  week.  In  1892  the  hours  were 
raised  to  the  correct  number,  namely  8  hours  a  day, 
with  half  an  hour  for  a  meal.  In  1896,  9  telegraph 
clerks  from  Manchester  sent  a  spokesman  to  the 
Tweedmouth  Committee  to  state  that  they  had  become 
telegraph  clerks  in  1890,  when  the  hours  were  35  a 
week,  and  that  they  deemed  it  a  "hardship"  to  be  com- 
pelled to  work  8  hours  a  day.^ 


*  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments,  1888;  q.  10,545  and  following,  and 
20,043  and  following. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  <!•  13,279,  13,301  and  following. 


I 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  329 

In  November,  1902,  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Fi- 
nancial Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  stated  in  the  House 
of  Commons :  "The  town  postmen  at  Newton  Abbot 
were  formerly  paid  on  too  high  a  scale  [in  consequence 
of  an  error  of  judgment  made  by  a  departmental  offi- 
cer] .  The  wages  were  accordingly  reduced  some  years 
ago,  but  the  postmen  then  in  the  service  were  allowed 
to  retain  their  old  scale  of  payment  so  long  as  they 
should  remain  in  the  service,  and  the  new  scale  was 
applied  only  to  postmen  who  entered  the  service  subse- 
quently. This  will  account  for  there  being  temporar- 
ily two  scales  for  postmen  at  Newton  Abbott."^ 

In  1 88 1,  Mr.  Fawcett,  Postmaster  General,  estab- 
lished for  Metropolitan  London  the  class  of  "senior 
telegraphists,"  with  a  salary  rising  by  annual  incre- 
ments of  $40,  from  $800  to  $950.  He  intended  that 
this  class  should  be  filled  by  the  promotion  of  men 
from  the  first  class  of  telegraphists  who  possessed  ex- 
ceptional manipulative  efficiency  as  well  as  sufficient 
executive  ability  to  act  as  assistants  to  the  assistant 
superintendents.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact  many  men 
were  promoted  to  this  class  by  mere  seniority  and  with- 
Standard  of  ^^^    reference    to    their    qualifications. 

Efficiency  should  In  1890,  however,  under  Mr.  Raikes, 
not  he  Raised  Postmaster  General,  the  Department 
resolved  to  promote  to  the  senior  class  no  more  men  who 
were  not  fully  qualified.^    And  in  1894,  the  Department 

'^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  November  21,  1902,  p.  147. 
'^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July    16,    1897,   p.   352.     Mr. 
R.   W.   Hanbury,    Financial   Secretary  to   the   Treasury   and   repre- 


330  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

imposed  a  technical  examination^  between  the  first 
class  of  telegraphists  and  the  senior  class,  in  order 
to  insure  that  all  men  promoted  to  the  senior  class 
should  have  the  qualifications  required  of  them.  Mr. 
H.  C.  Fischer,  Controller  of  the  London  Central 
Telegraph  Office,  said  of  this  examination:  "It  is 
not  considered  unjust  that  this  should  have  been  en- 
forced in  the  case  of  men  who  had  always  been  em- 
ployed on  instrument  duties,  and  who  had  only  them- 
selves to  blame  if  they  neglected  to  acquire  some 
knowledge  of  technical  matters,  which  all  skilled  teleg- 

senting  the  Postmaster  General:  "But  there  were  in  the  senior 
class  certain  men  who,  owing  to  the  fact  that  they  had  been  pro- 
moted by  seniority  without  passing  any  examination,  were  not  quite 
up  to  the  normal  average  of  the  senior  class." 

The  reader  will  note  that  in  1890  no  effort  was  made  to  remove 
the  men  not  up  to  the  standard  of  the  senior  class.  The  Govern- 
ment had  to  await  the  retirement  or  the  death  of  the  incompetent 
men. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OfUce 
Establishments,  1897  ;  Mr.  H.  C.  Fischer,  Controller  London  Central 
Telegraph  Office ;  q.  2,305. 

The  examination  covers:  (i)  "Crossing  and  looping  wires  with 
facility  and  certainty.  (2)  Tracing  and  localizing  faults  in  instru- 
ments. (3)  Tracing  and  localizing  permanent  and  intermittent 
earth  contact  and  disconnection  faults  on  wires.  (4)  Methods  of 
testing  the  electro-motive  force  and  resistance  of  batteries,  and  a 
general  knowledge  of  the  essential  features  of  the  various  descrip- 
tions of  batteries.  (5)  System  of  morning  testing,  both  as  regards 
sending  and  receiving  currents,  with  the  necessary  calculations  in 
connection  with  the  same.  (6)  Making  up  special  circuits  in  cases 
of  emergency.  (7)  Joining  up  and  adjusting  single-needle,  single- 
current,  and  double-current  Morse,  both  simplex  and  duplex,  and 
Wheatstone  apparatus.  (8)  Fitting  a  Wheatstone  transmitter  to  an 
ordinary  key-worked  circuit.  (9)  A  general  knowledge  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  quadruplex  and  multiplex  working.  (10)  Measuring  re- 
sistance by  Wheatstone  bridge." 

These  subjects  are  the  same  as  those  prescribed  for  superin- 
tendents and  assistant  superintendents,  but  the  examination  is  less 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  331 

raphists  are  expected  to  possess Even  before  the 

institution  of  the  examination  it  was  always  held  that 
the  possession  of  technical  knowledge  gave  the  man  an 
additional  claim  to  promotion  to  the  senior  class."^ 

Before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee  the  representa- 
tives of  the  first  class  telegraphists  complained  of  the 
technical  examination  as  a  "grievance/'  They  said: 
"The  regulation  came  into  operation  at  once,  an  act 
which  is  regarded  as  exceptionally  unjust  toward  men 
of  more  than  20  years'  service,  who,  up  to  that  time 
had  understood  from  the  general  practice  of  the  De- 
partment, that,  other  things  being  equal,  good  conduct 
and  manipulative  efficiency  would  secure  promotion. 
Now,  however,  the  possession  of  technical  knowledge 
is  added  as  a  necessary  qualification  before  promotion 
to  the  senior  class,  and  this  without  a  coincident  rise 
in  the  maximum  [salary]  of  the  first  class  as  compen- 
sation for  the  additional  demand  upon  the  capacity  of 
the  staff."  As  the  alternative  to  the  raising  of  the 
maximum  salary  of  the  first  class  [$800],  "it  was 
earnestly  contended  that  the  scale  to  which  the  officer 
is  raised  on  passing  the  examination  should  be  materi- 
ally enhanced  [beyond  the  present  maximum  of  $950] 
in  recompense  for  the  further  additional  demand  upon 
his  time,  and  for  his  pecuniary  outlay  in  preparing 
himself  for  the  requirements  of  the  Department. "^ 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  Appendix,  p,  1,083. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  Appendix,  p.  1,078;  and  q.  2,320,  Mr.  Nichol- 


332  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Prior  to  November,  1886,  special  intelligence  was 
required  of  the  sorters  of  foreign  letters  in  the  London 
Central  Post  Office,  who  were  correspondingly  well 
paid.  The  wages  of  the  first  class  of  sorters  of  foreign 
letters  began  at  $13.75  a  week,  and  rose  to  $17.50,  by 
triennial  increments  of  $1.25  a  week.  Those  of  the 
second  class  began  at  $11.25,  ^^^  ^^se  to  $13.75,  by 
annual  increments  of  $0.50  a  week.  But  in  conse- 
quence of  a  material  simplification  of  the  duties  of  the 
foreign  letter  sorters,  consequent  upon  the  changes  in 
the  international  postage  charges,  the  Department  re- 
solved, in  November,  1886,  to  replace  the  two  classes 
of  sorters  of  foreign  letters  by  one  class,  with  wages 
ranging  from  $12.50  a  week  to  $15.^  It  was  pro- 
vided, however,  that  the  existing  sorters  of  the  first 
class  should  retain  the  old  scale  of  wages;  and  that 
the  existing  sorters  of  the  second  class  should  have 
the  option  of  immediate  promotion  to  the  new  class, 
with  wages  rising  from  $12.50  to  $15,  or,  "of  being 
advanced  to  the  $13.75  to  $17.50  scale,  in  the  order  in 
which  they  would  have  attained  to  that  scale  if  the  old 
first  class  scale  had  not  been  abolished."  In  other 
words,  the  men  who,  prior  to  November,  1886,  had 
been  In  line  for  ultimate  promotion  to  a  class  carrying 
wages  of  $13.75  to  $17.50,  were  offered  the  option  "of 


son,  Chairman  London  Branch,  Postal  Telegraph  Clerks  Association. 
See  also:  q.  3,919,  4,135,  i3,333,  I3,344,  I3,4i5,  I5,i42,  and  Ap- 
pendix, p.  1,083. 

*The  wages  of  the  sorters  of  inland  letters  at  the  time  were: 
$10  to  $14  for  the  first  class,  and  $4.50  to  $10  for  the  second  class. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  333 

being  regarded  as  having  a  vested  interest  to  rise  to 
$17.50  a  week,  as  vacancies  should  occur."^ 

In  1895,  Mr.  H.  B.  Irons,  a  second  class  sorter  in 
London,  appeared  before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee 
to  present  the  grievance  of  himself  and  colleagues, 
Claim  of  Exemp-  ^ho,  prior  to  1886,  had  given  up  the 
Hon  from  Vicissi-  position  of  first  class  letter  carriers  to 
tudes  of  Life  become  second  class  letter  sorters  in 
order  to  improve  their  prospects  of  promotion.  The 
grievance  was  that  the  prospects  of  promotion  of  letter 
sorters  had  been  curtailed  by  the  abolition  of  the  sorter- 
ships  of  foreign  letters  in  1886,  and  the  abolition  of 
the  sortership  of  the  first  class  of  inland  and  foreign 
newspapers  in  1890.  Mr.  Irons  alleged  that  he  would 
have  remained  a  letter  carrier  had  he  foreseen  the 
changes  in  question.^  His  argument  was  that  the 
civil  servant  must  be  exempt  from  the  ordinary  chances 
and  vicissitudes  of  life. 

In  1890  some  senior  telegraphists  protested  that  they 
ought  to  be  made  assistant  superintendents,  alleging 
that  they  were  performing  the  duties  of  assistant  super- 
intendents. Mr.  Raikes,  Postmaster  General,  found 
that  some  of  the  duties  of  the  complainants  were  of  the 
nature  alleged,  but  not  all  of  them.     Therefore,  he 


*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  Mr.  J.  C.  Badcock,  Controller  London  Postal 
Service;  q.  2,190  et  passim,  and  Appendix,  pp.  1,063  and  1,074. 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897  ;  q.  719  and  following. 


S34  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

made  the  complainants,  forty-nine  in  number,  second 
class  assistant  superintendents.  By  1896,  this  new 
class  had  come  to  number  sixty-five. 

From  1 88 1  to  1890,  the  proportion  borne  by  the 
senior  telegraphists  to  the  first  class  and  second  class 
telegraphists  had  ranged  between  i  to  6.6  and  i  to  'j.'j. 
The  promotion  of  forty-nine  senior  telegraphists  in 
1890,  and  of  the  others  in  subsequent  years,  raised  the 
proportion  in  question  to  i  to  10,  in  1895.  But  count- 
ing senior  telegraphists  and  second  class  assistant  super- 
intendents, there  was,  in  1895,  one  of  these  superior 
officers  to  each  6.5  of  first  class  and  second  class  teleg- 
raphists. In  other  words,  the  rate  of  promotion  of 
first  class  and  second  class  telegraphists  to  appoint- 
ments superior  to  the  first  class  of  telegraphists,  but 
inferior  to  the  position  of  assistant  superintendent,  had 
been  more  rapid  in  1891  to  1895,  than  it  had  been  in 
1 88 1  to  1890. 

In  1895,  Mr.  Nicholson,  Chairman  London  Branch 
of  the  Postal  Telegraph  Clerks'  Association,  appeared 
before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee  to  voice  the  griev- 
ance of  the  first  class  and  second  class  telegraphists, 
which  was,  that  the  rate  of  promotion  from  the  second 
class  and  first  class  had  decreased,  as  shown  by  the 
fact  that  there  was  only  one  senior  telegraphist  to 
each  ten  first  class  and  second  class  telegraphists.  Mr. 
Nicholson  contended  that  the  increase  of  telegraphic 
messages  consequent  upon  the  introduction  of  the 
charge  of  12  cents  for  I3  words  had  necessitated  the 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  335 

creation  of  a  new  class,  the  second  class  superintend- 
ents ;  and  that  the  first  class  and  second  class  telegraph- 
ists had  a  right  to  demand  that  they  should  derive 
benefit  from  that  increase  of  traffic  and  that  necessity 
of  creating  a  new  class  of  officers.  That  the  Depart- 
ment's failure  to  fill  the  vacancies  created  in  the  senior 
class  of  telegraphists  by  promotions  to  the  class  of 
second  class  superintendents,  had  deprived  the  first 
class  and  second  class  telegraphists  of  all  advantage 
arising  out  of  the  creation  of  a  new  class  of  officers, 
the  second  class  assistant  superintendents.^ 

The  nature  of  the  claim  made  by  the  Chairman  Lon- 
don Branch  of  the  Postal  Telegraph  Clerks'  Associa- 
tion is  forcibly  illustrated  by  the  following  incident 
from  the  proceedings  of  the  Royal  Commission  on 
Civil  Establishments,  1888.  Mr.  H.  A.  Davies,  the 
official  representative  of  the  clerks  in  the  Receiver  and 
Risht  to  Accountant    General's    Office    of    the 

Fixed  Rate  General  Post  Office,  had  made  a  simi- 

of  Promotion  j^^.  demand  on  behalf  of  the  men  whom 
he  represented.  The  Chairman  asked  him:  "Does  a 
man  enter  the  public  service  on  the  assumption  that  all 
the  upper  places  are  to  remain  the  same  as  when  he 
enters If  you  and  I  enter  the  public  service  find- 
ing a  certain  Department,  the  Post  Office  or  any  other, 
with  twenty  posts  above  to  which  we  had  a  reasonable 
hope,  if  we  behaved  well,  and  showed  merit ;  if  admin- 


*  Report    of    the   Inter-Departmental   Committee    on   Post    OMce 
Establishments,  1897  >  Q-  2,292  to  2,366,  and  3,945  and  following. 


336  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

istrative  reform  takes  away  five  of  these  posts,  are  we 
entitled  to  compensation,  because  that  is  what  it  [your 
allegation  of  grievance]  comes  to  ?  Can  you  say,  there 
being  no  contract  whatever  between  me  and  the  State 
when  I  entered  the  office  as  a  clerk,  no  contract  what- 
ever that  I  should  attain  to  a  higher  post,  except  when 
there  is  a  vacancy,  that  I  have  a  claim  [to  compensa- 
tion] when  administrative  reform  takes  away  some  of 
the  other  places?"  The  spokesman  of  the  Post  Office 
clerks  replied :  "If  I  were  defending  that  [position]  to 
Parliament,  I  think  I  should  say  that  the  country  has 
a  certain  duty  toward  men  who,  when  they  entered  the 
service,  had,  judging  by  the  precedents  of  their  office, 
a  fair  prospect  of  reasonable  promotion,  and  that  if 
any  economy  is  effected  by  subsequent  administrative 
reforms,  the  sufferers  deserve  some  consideration/'^ 

From  1885  to  1888  Mr.  Lawson,  M.  P. ,2  was  a 
Member  of  the  Royal  Commission  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  Civil  Establishments.  In  March,  1889,  he 
intervened  in  the  administration  of  the  Post  Office  by 
asking  the  Postmaster  General  how  many  vacancies 
there  were  in  the  first  class  of  telegraphists  at  the  Cen- 
tral Telegraph  Offxe,  London ;  how  long  those  vacan- 

^  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 
ments, 1888;  q.  20,291  to  20,346. 

^  Who's  Who,  1905,  Lawson,  Hon.  H.  L.  W. ;  Lieutenant-Colonel 
and  Honorable-Colonel  commanding  Royal  Bucks  Hussars ;  e.  s.  of 
ist  Baron  Burnham.  Education:  Eton;  Balliol  College,  Oxford. 
M.  P.  (L.)  West  St.  Pancras,  1885-92;  East  Gloucestershire,  1883-9S  ; 
L.  C.  C.  West  St.  Pancras,  1889-92,  and  Whitechapel,  1897-1904. 


I 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  337 

cies  had  been  open,  and  whether  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral had  received  a  petition  from  the  second  class  teleg- 
raphists for  their  promotion;  and  whether  there  was 
anything  to  prevent  him  from  complying  with  the  re- 
quest. The  Postmaster  General  replied  that  on  Janu- 
ary I,  1889,  there  had  been  53  vacancies.  "To  thirty- 
four  of  those  vacancies  I  have  made  promotions  within 
the  last  few  days ;  and  this,  practically,  is  an  answer  to 
the  petition  of  December,  1888."^  The  reader  will  re- 
call that  in  February,  1888,  Mr.  Lawson  had  inter- 
vened on  behalf  of  a  letter  carrier  who  had  been  dis- 
missed in  1882.  In  1889  to  1892,  and  1897  to  1904, 
Mr.  Lawson  was  a  Member  of  the  London  County 
Council. 

In  June,  1902,  Mr.  Hay,  M.  P.,^  asked  the  Postmas- 
ter General,  through  the  Financial  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury :  "With  reference  to  the  fact  that  the  propor- 
tion of  appointments  above  $800  a  year  in  the  Central 
Telegraph  Office,  London,  now  bears  the  same  relation 
to  the  staff  below  that  salary  as  during  the  period  when 
the  circular  [1881  to  1891]  was  issued  promising  a 
prospect  of  $950,  whether  he  is  aware  that  during  the 
years  1882  to  1892  the  proportion  was  one  appoint- 
ment above  $800  to  5.5  below  [that  salary],  and  that 
the  proportion  at  the  present  time  is  one  appointment 
above  $800  to  6.4  below;  and,  seeing  that  this  differ- 

^  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  28,  1889,  p.  1,022. 

^  Who's  Who,  190S,  Hay,  Honorable  C.  G.  D.,  M.  P.  (C.)   since 
1900 ;  partner  in  Ramsford  &  Co.,  Stock-brokers ;  founder,  manager, 
and  director  of  the  Fine  Art  and  General  Insurance  Co.,  Ltd. 
22 


338  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

ence  of  proportion  represents  nearly  forty  appoint- 
ments, above  $800,  whether  he  will  take  steps  to  read- 
just that  proportion  on  the  basis  of  i  to  5.5?"^  In 
1906,  Mr.  Hay  was  made  a  member  of  the  Select  Com- 
mittee on  Post  Office  Servants. 

In  April  and  in  August,  1902,  Captain  Norton  asked 
the  Postmaster  General,  through  the  Financial  Secre- 
tary to  the  Treasury,  to  appoint  so  many  additional 
senior  telegraphists  that  it  should  no  longer  be  neces- 
sary to  call  on  men  in  the  class  below  to  act  as  sub- 
stitutes for  the  senior  telegraphists  who  were  taking 
their  annual  leave  of  one  month.^  In  1906,  Captain 
Norton  became  a  Junior  Lord  of  the  Treasury  in  the 
Sir  Campbell-Bannerman  Ministry. 

In  February,  1902,  Mr.  Plummer^  stated  that  at 
Newcastle-on-Tyne  thirty-eight  telegraphists,  who  had, 
on  an  average,  served  27  years  each,  were  waiting  for 
promotion.  "Will  the  Postmaster  General  facilitate 
promotion  by  enforcing  in  the  future  the  Civil  Service 
Regulation  with  reference  to  retirement*  at  the  age  of 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  2,  1902,  p.  1,096. 
^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  April  15,  1902,  p.  283;  and 

August  I,  1902,  p.  396. 

'Who's  Who,  1905,  Plummer,  Sir  W.  R.,  Kt.  cr.  1904;  M.  P. 
(C.)  Newcastle-on-Tyne  since  1900;  merchant;  member  of  City 
Council;  Director  of  Newcastle  and  Gateshead  Gas  Co. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  March  25,  1903;  Mr.  Austen 
Chamberlain,  Postmaster  General:  "The  regulation  is  that  all 
pensionable  officers  of  whatever  grade  whose  conduct,  capacity,  and 
efficiency  fall  below  a  fair  standard  shall  be  called  upon  to  retire 
at  sixty ;  but  retirement  at  sixty  is  not  enforced  in  the  case  of 
officers  whose  conduct  is  good,  and  who  are  certified  by  their  supe- 
rior officers  to  be  thoroughly  efficient." 


I 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  339 

Sixty  years?"  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Financial 
Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  replied :  "The  Postmaster 
General  would  not  feel  justified  in  enforcing  the  re- 
tirement of  any  efficient  officers  for  the  purpose  of  ac- 
celerating the  promotion  of  others."  On  August  i, 
1902,  Captain  Norton  repeated  the  request.^ 

On  November  24,  1902,  Mr.  O'Brien  asked  the  Post- 
master to  create  more  rapid  promotion  at  Liverpool  by 
retiring  all  men  who  had  qualified  for  the  maximum 
pension  [two-thirds  of  salary],  irrespective  of  the  fit- 
ness of  such  men  to  continue  to  serve.^ 

On  June  19,  1902,  Mr.  Keir  Hardie  asked  the  Sec- 
retary to  the  Treasury,  as  representing  the  Postmaster 
General :  "Whether  he  will  state  the  special  qualifica- 
tions which  necessitate  the  retention  in  the  Postal  serv- 
ice of  the  assistant  superintendent,  Mr.  Napper,  and 
the  inspector,  Mr.  Graham,  at  the  West  Central  Dis- 
trict Office,  after  reaching  60  years  of  age ;  and  if  the 
probable  date  of  retirement  can  be  given?"  On  July 
28,  1902,  Mr.  Keir  Hardie  asked:  "If  he  will  state 
what  are  the  special  qualifications  which  necessitate 
the  retention  of  the  inspector,  Mr.  E.  Stamp,  at  the 
North  Western  District  Office,  after  attaining  the  age 
of  60  years;  and  if  he  can  give  the  probable  date  of 
this  officer's  retirement?"^ 


^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  February  4,  1902,  and  Aug- 
ust I,  1902,  p.  396, 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  November  24,  1902,  p.  231. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  19,  1902,  p.  1,101  ;  and 
July  28,  1902,  p.  1,346. 


340  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Any  officer  who  is  retired  with  a  pension,  on  account 
of  ill  health,  before  he  is  sixty  years  of  age,  may,  if  he 
recovers  his  health,  be  recalled  to  duty  at  the  discre- 
tion of  the  head  of  his  Department  or  of  the  Treasury. 
Under  such  circumstances  the  officer  receives  the  sal- 
ary of  his  new  office  and  so  much  of  his  pension  as 
shall  be  sufficient  to  make  his  total  income  equal  to  the 
original  pension.  Under  the  foregoing  rule  two  offi- 
cers were  made  respectively  postmaster  at  Bristol  and 
postmaster  at  Hastings. 

Before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee,  Mr.  Uren, 
President  of  the  Postmasters'  Association,  protested 
against  such  "blocking  of  some  of  the  best  offices  by 

pensioners Here  are  two  good  offices,  one  with 

$4,000  a  year,  and  the  other  with  $2,750,  which  are 
taken  up  by  pensioners  who  recover  their  health,  and 

so  block  a  line  of  promotion I  only  mention  these 

as  the  two  most  recent  cases  with  which  this  sort  of 
thing  has  happened,  but  they  are  not  the  only  occasions 
by  a  good  many,  which  I  am  instructed  to  bring  before 
your  Committee  as  a  fair  subject  for  consideration." 
Mr.  Crosse,  another  witness,  added:  "The  Postal 
Clerks*  Association  also  desire  to  endorse  the  evidence 
put  forward  by  the  Postmasters'  Association  as  to  the 
anomaly  and  injustice  of  certain  postmasters  being  re- 
tained in  the  service  who  are  in  the  receipt  of  pension 
and  salary  from  the  Department."* 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897;  q.   12,537  to   12,551;  and  Appendix,  p.    1,108. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  QVIL  SERVICE  341 

Prior  to  August,  1891,  the  postmen  of  metropoli- 
tan London  were  divided  into  two  classes :  the  second 
class,  with  wages  rising  from  $4.50  a  week  to  $6,  by 
annual  increments  of  $0.25  a  week;  and  the  first  class, 
with  wages  rising  from  $6  a  week,  to  $7.50,  by  annual 
increments  of  $0.25  a  week.  In  consequence  of  the 
rapid  growth  of  the  postal  business,  however,  the  post- 
men frequently  passed  through  the  second  class  into  the 

Mechanical  ^^^^  ^^^^^»  "^^  ^^  ^^^  yt2irs,  but  in  from 

Equality  two  to  five  ycars.     But  the  rate  of  pro- 

Demanded  motion  from  the  second  class  into  the 

first  differed  materially  in  the  several  metropolitan 
branch  offices,  because  of  the  unequal  growth  of  busi- 
ness at  those  several  offices.  That  inequality  of  pro- 
motion violated  the  ideal^  of  the  civil  servants,  whicli 
is,  that  all  should  fare  alike;  and  therefore,  the  post- 
men demanded  that  the  division  into  two  classes  be 
abolished,  and  that  every  postman  should  rise,  by 
stated  annual  increments,  from  the  initial  wage  of 
$4.50  to  the  final  wage  of  $7.50.  But  the  abolition  of 
classification  would  put  an  end  to  the  possibility  of 
those  rapid  passings  through  the  stages  between  $4.50 
and  $6  that  had  been  of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  past 
in  some  of  the  metropolitan  branch  offices.     By  way  of 

See  also :  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Estab- 
lishments, 1888,  p.  xxiii ;  and  Third  Report  from  the  Select  Com- 
mittee on  Civil  Services  Expenditure,  1873  ;  Mr.  R.  E.  Welby,  Prin- 
cipal Clerk  for  Financial  Business  in  the  Treasury;  q.  507  to  515. 

^  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OfUce 
Establishments,  1897;  Mr.  E.  B.  L.  Hill,  Assistant  Secretary  Gen- 
eral Post  Office,  London;  q.  15,134. 


342  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

compensation  for  the  loss  of  that  chance  the  postmen 
demanded  that  the  annual  increment  be  increased  be- 
yond $0.25  a  week. 

The  Department,  in  August,  1891,  abolished  the 
classification  of  the  postmen,  but  it  refused  to  raise  the 
annual  increment.  It  said  that  the  rapid  promotion 
from  $4.50  to  $6  that  had  characterized  the  past  had 
been  an  accident,  that  it  had  not  been  foreseen,  and 
that  the  men  who  had  entered  the  service  while  it  had 
obtained  had  not  acquired  a  vested  right  to  it.  In 
1896  the  men  who  had  been  postmen  prior  to  the  abo- 
lition of  classification  appeared  before  the  Tweedmouth 
Committee  with  the  statement  that  they  "were  under 
the  impression  that  it  was  an  official  principle  that  no 
individual  should  suffer  by  the  introduction  of  a  new 
scale  of  promotion  or  wages."  They  demanded  com- 
pensation for  the  fact  that  they  had  lost,  in  1891,  the 
possibility  of  passing  in  less  than  the  regular  time  from 
the  wage  of  $4.50  to  that  of  $6.  They  stated  that  they 
were  prepared  to  show  that  "they  had  suffered  material 
pecuniary  loss ....  amounting  in  some  cases  to  about 
$500."^  All  of  which  goes  to  show  that  in  the  British 
Post  Office  service  the  abolition  of  a  grievance  can  in 
turn  become  a  grievance. 

Before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee  appeared  also 
the  representatives  of  the  telegraphers,  to  demand  the 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OfUce 
Establishments,  1897  ;  Mr.  H.  Symes,  representative  of  the  London 
Postmen;  q.  10,115  to  10,197;  and  Mr.  %  C.  Badcock,  Controller 
London  Postal  Service;  q.  11,492. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  343 

abolition  of  the  division  of  the  telegraphers  into  classes, 
with  promotion  by  merit  between  the  classes.  They 
Equality,  not  demanded  amalgamation  into  a  single 
Opportunity  class,  in  which  each  one  should  pass 
automatically  from  the  minimum  pay  to  the  maximum, 
provided  he  was  not  arrested  by  the  efficiency  bar,  to 
be  placed  at  $800  a  year.  Mr.  E.  B.  L.  Hill,  Assist- 
ant Secretary,  General  Post  Office,  London,  began  his 
discussion  of  this  demand  by  quoting  with  approval 
the  conclusion  of  the  Telegraph  Committee  of  1893, 
which  was :  "We  have  taken  great  pains  to  investigate 
this  matter.  Almost  without  exception  the  provincial 
postmasters  and  telegraph  superintendents  were  op- 
posed to  an  amalgamation  of  the  classes,  and  gave  the 
strongest  testimony  to  the  value  of  the  present  division 
[into  classes]  as  a  means  of  discouraging  indifference, 
and  encouraging  zeal  and  efficiency.  We  think .... 
that  for  purposes  of  discipline  it  is  desirable  to  main- 
tain the  division  of  the  establishment  into  two  classes." 
Mr.  Hill  continued  by  saying  that  in  the  course  of  the 
last  three  or  four  years  he  had  changed  his  opinion, 
and  had  come  to  the  conclusion  that  amalgamation 
into  one  class  must  come.  "The  staff  seems  to  desire, 
first  of  all,  equality,  and  the  abolition  of  classification 
seems  to  insure  the  fulfillment  of  that  wish.  At  the 
same  time  classification  is  a  valuable  incentive  to  exer- 
tion and  efficiency "* 

*  Report    of    the   Inter-Departmental   Committee    on   Post   OMce 
Establishments t  1897;  q.  15,134  et  passim. 


344  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

In  1896  the  proportion  borne  by  the  supervising  offi- 
cers above  the  rank  of  first  class  sorting  clerks  to  the 
total  staff  of  sorting  clerks  was  18.85  per  cent.,  where- 
as the  proportion  borne  by  the  officers  above  the  rank 
of  first  class  telegraphists  to  the  total  staff  was  12.59 
per  cent.  At  the  same  time  the  proportion  borne  by 
the  first  class  clerks  to  the  total  of  first  and  second  class 
clerks  was  20.17  per  cent,  on  the  postal  side  of  the 
service,  and  24.64  per  cent,  on  the  telegraph  side.  In 
other  words,  the  chances  of  promotion  to  a  supervis- 
ing position  are  much  better  in  the  postal  branch  than 
in  the  telegraph  branch;  so  much  so,  that  to  an  able 
and  energetic  man,  the  postal  branch  is  more  attractive 
than  the  telegraph  branch,  even  though  the  chances  of 
reaching  a  first  class  clerkship  are  somewhat  better  in 
the  telegraph  branch  than  in  the  postal  branch.     But 

^  . .  the  letter  sortinsf  clerk's  work  is  more 

Opportunities 

Rejected;  In-        irksome  than  the  work  of  the  telegraph- 

creased  Pay  ist,    and    therefore    "the    telegraphists 

are  usually  reluctant,  notwithstanding 
the  better  prospects  of  promotion,  to  accept  work  on  the 
postal  side."  For  example,  in  the  four  years  ending 
with  1896,  only  ten  telegraphists  at  Birmingham  had 
themselves  transferred  to  the  postal  side,  and  three  of 
those  ten  had  themselves  re-transferred  to  the  instru- 
ment room,  because  the  work  on  the  postal  side  proved 
too  hard  for  them.  Again,  on  March  6,  1896,  Mr. 
Harley,  the  postmaster  at  Manchester,  issued  the  fol- 
lowing notice :  "I  should  like  to  afford  an  opportunity 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  345 

to  telegraphists  in  this  office  of  becoming  acquainted 
with  letter  sorting  duties,  and,  with  this  view,  if  a 
sufficient  number  of  officers  apply,  I  will  arrange  an 
evening  duty  of  from  2  to  3  hours  in  the  sorting  office 
for  a  month  in  every  three,  such  duty  to  form  a 
portion  of  their  8  hours'  duty.  About  50  officers 
would  be  required  to  enable  me  to  carry  this  suggestion 
into  effect,  and  I  shall  be  glad  if  all  officers  who  are 
disposed  to  avail  themselves  of  this  opportunity  of  ac- 
quiring postal  knowledge  will  submit  their  names/' 
At  the  end  of  three  weeks  Mr.  Harley  had  not  had  a 
single  response,  though  he  had  in  person  explained  to 
a  number  of  "representative  telegraphists  the  advan- 
tage which  a  knowledge  of  postal  work  would  give 
them." 

The  telegraphists,  as  a  body,  decline  to  avail  them- 
selves of  the  opportunities  offered  them  to  improve 
their  chances  of  promotion;  none  the  less  they  allege 
they  have  a  grievance  in  the  fact  that  their  chances  of 
promotion  are  not  so  good  as  are  the  chances  of  the 
sorting  clerks.  They  demand  that  the  Post  Office  re- 
dress their  grievance,  either  by  increasing  the  number 
of  telegraph  supervising  officers,  or  by  raising  the 
salaries  of  the  first  and  second  class  telegraphists  suffi- 
ciently to  compensate  the  telegraphists  for  their  smaller 
chance  of  becoming  supervising  officers.* 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897 ;  Mr.  Lewin  Hill,  Assistant  Secretary  General 
Post  Office,  London;  q.  i5»i35  to  15,142;  Mr.  T.  D.  Venables,  Gen- 
eral   Secretary    Postal   Telegraph    Clerks'    Association ;    q.    4,620    ef 


346  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

The  telegraphists  even  try  to  bring  pressure  on  the 
Government  to  stop  the  Post  Office  from  forcing  them 
to  learn  letter  sorting.  For  example,  in  1896,  the 
Post  Office  required  the  telegraphists  and  sorters  em- 
ployed in  the  Oxford  Central  Post  Office  to  work  at  the 
pleasure  of  the  Oxford  postmaster  at  letter  sorting  or 
at  telegraphing.  The  Oxford  telegraph  clerks  argued 
that  they  had  contracts  with  the  Government  to  work 
as  telegraph  operators,  and  that  the  Government  had 
Parliamentary  ^^  right  to  force  them  either  to  do  sort- 
Intervention  jng,  or  to  suffer  transfer  to  some  other 

office  where  the  convenience  of  the  Government  would 
not  be  affected  by  their  refusal  to  act  as  sorters.  The 
clerks  kept  up  their  agitation  for  years,  and  in  Decem- 
ber, 1902,  they  induced  Mr.  Samuel,^  M.  P.,  to  cham- 
pion their  cause  in  the  House  of  Commons.^  Mr. 
Samuel,  in  1895  and  1900,  had  contested  unsuccess- 
fully South  Oxfordshire.  He  took  "First  Class  Hon- 
ors" at  Oxford,  and  he  has  published :  Liberalism,  Its 
Principles  and  Purposes.  In  1906,  Mr.  Samuel  be- 
came Under  Home  Secretary  in  the  Campbell-Banner- 
man  Ministry. 

In  June,  1904,  Mr.  William  Jones  asked  the  Post- 
master General:  "Whether  he  is  aware  that  for  some 

passim ;  and  Mr.  Jno.  Qiristie,  first  class  telegraphist  at  Edinburgh ; 
q.  5,117  et  passim. 

*  Who's  Who,  igo4,  Samuel,  Herbert,  (L.)  M*.  P.,  Cleveland 
Division  of  N.  Riding,  Yorkshire,  since  1902.  Contested  unsuccess- 
fully. South  Oxfordshire,  1895  and  1900.  Education:  University 
College  School;  Balliol  College,  Oxford.  First  Class  Honors,  Ox- 
ford, 1893. 

*  Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  December  10,  1902,  p.  658. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  347 

time  past  endeavors  have  been  made  to  compel  the 
telegraph  staff  at  Oxford  to  perform  postal  duties,  and 
that  they  have  been  informed  that  they  would  be  re- 
moved compulsorily  to  other  offices  in  the  event  of  the 
men  declining  to  perform  those  duties;  and  whether, 
in  view  of  the  declaration  of  previous  Postmasters 
General,  that  telegraphists  who  had  entered  the  service 
before  1896  are  exempt  from  the  performance  of  postal 
work,  he  will  explain  the  reasons  for  his  action?" 
Lord  Stanley,  Postmaster  General,  replied :  "The  tele- 
graph work  at  Oxford  has  of  late  considerably  fallen 
off  [in  consequence  of  the  competition  from  the  tele- 
phone], and  there  is  consequently  not  sufficient  work 
to  keep  the  officers  in  the  telegraph  office  fully  occu- 
pied. Their  services  have  therefore  been  utilized  for 
the  benefit  of  the  Department  in  such  manner  as  the 
exigencies  of  the  service  require.  All  officers  of  the 
Department  are  expected  loyally  to  perform  any  work 
required  of  them  which  they  are  capable  of  undertak- 
ing; and  unless  some  means  can  be  found  of  utilizing 
the  services  of  redundant  telegraphists  at  the  offices 
where  they  are  at  present  employed,  a  transfer  to  an- 
other office  is  the  only  alternative."*  Mr.  Jones  had 
sat  in  Parliament  since  1895.  ^^  ^^  ^  private  tutor  at 
Oxford;  has  been  assistant  schoolmaster  at  Anglesey; 
and  has  served  under  the  London  School  Board.^ 
Within  ten  days  of  the  Jones  episode,  Mr.  Dobbie,^ 

'^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  6,  1904,  p.  780. 

=  Who's  Who,  1905. 

'At  the  by-election  of  January  29,  1904,  Mr.  Debbie  was  elected 


348  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

who  had  just  been  sent  to  ParHament  to  represent  Ayr 
Burghs,  Scotland,  intervened  on  behalf  of  the  Glas- 
gow Post  Office  clerks,  who  objected  to  being  com- 
pelled to  do  dual  duties.^  At  about  the  same  time  Mr. 
Henderson,  who,  before  entering  Parliament,  had  been 
a  Member  of  the  Newcastle  Town  Council,  intervened 
on  behalf  of  one  Chandler,  a  sorting  clerk  and  teleg- 
raphist at  Middlesbrough,  who  had  been  informed  that 
his  increment  would  be  withheld  because  of  his  igno- 
rance of  telegraphy.  The  Postmaster  General  replied : 
"All  the  circumstances  of  his  case  have  already  been 
examined  more  than  once  both  by  my  predecessor  and 
myself,  and  I  am  quite  satisfied  that  he  has  received 
proper  treatment."^ 

In  October,  1906,  Mr.  Parker,  M.  P.,  intervened 
on  behalf  of  some  telegraph  clerks  at  Halifax  who  were 
being  made  to  sort  letters.^ 

The  Bradford  Committee  on  Post  Office  Wages, 
1904,  reported:  "...  .it  was  pointed  out  that  in  the 
larger  offices  promotion  is  better  on  the  Postal  side.  .  . . 
This  is  admitted,  though  we  understand  that  it  is  open 
to  any  telegraphists  to  acquire  a  knowledge  of  Postal 
business,  and  so  qualify  for  promotion  on  either  side. 
It  is  found  that  this  is  not  done,  however,  as  the  men 
prefer  the  Telegraph  work  to  the  more  irksome  Postal 
duties.'* 

by  a  majority  of  44 ;  at  the  General  Election  of  January,  1906,  he 
was  defeated  by  261  votes.  The  number  of  electors  in  the  Ayr 
District  is  8,031. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  14,   1904. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  13,  1904. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  October  29,  1906,  p.  669. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  349 

The  Post  Office  gives  those  counter  men  of  London 
and  Dublin  who  receive  or  pay  money  over  the  coun- 
Sundry  Vested  ter,  a  risk  allowance,  for  the  purpose 
Rights  of  reimbursing  them  for  any  errors  that 

they  may  make  in  dealing  with  the  public.  No  such 
allowance  is  given  to  the  postal  clerks  in  any  other 
city ;  nor  are  such  allowances  paid  by  railway  companies 
or  other  private  employers.  Upon  the  provincial 
Post  Office  clerks  making  a  demand  for  equal  treat- 
ment with  the  London  and  Dublin  clerks,  the  Depart- 
ment decided  to  discontinue  the  allowances  in  London 
and  Dublin  "as  to  future  entrants  to  the  postal  serv- 
ice," and  under  "the  most  sacred  preservation  of  all 
existing  interests."^  The  Tweedmouth  Committee  en- 
dorsed this  resolution,  with  the  statement  that  "the 
rights  of  existing  holders  of  risk  allowances  should,  of 
course,  in  all  cases  be  maintained." 

The  Tweedmouth  Committee  suggested  a  new  scale 
of  pay  for  the  several  kinds  of  letter  sorters  in  Lon- 
don. That  new  scale  was  suggested  for  two  reasons : 
for  the  purpose  of  discontinuing  the  complex  system 
of  special  allowances  that  had  sprung  up ;  and  for  the 
purpose  of  reducing  the  pay  of  several  classes  of  sort- 
ers, the  existing  scale  of  payment  being  too  high.  The 
Committee  proposed  that  all  existing  rights  be  safe- 
guarded, saying :  "Present  holders  of  allowances  should 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OfUce 
Establishments,  1897;  Mr.  E.  B.  L.  Hill,  Assistant  Secretary  Gen- 
eral Post  Office,  London;  q.  15,180;  and  Mr.  S.  Walpole,  Secretary 
to  the  Post  Office;  q.  15,274. 


350  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

enter  the  [new]  scale  of  salary  at  a  point  equal  t©  their 
previous  salary  and  allowances  combined,  and  wher- 
ever the  maximum  of  the  present  scale  together  with 
the  allowances  exceeds  the  maximum  of  the  new  scale, 
that,  but  no  further  excess,  should  be  granted."^ 

The  Tweedmouth  Committee  also  reported:  "We 
think  that  the  holidays  of  the  Dublin  and  Edinburgh 
[telegram]  tracers  should  for  the  future  be  14  week 
days,  the  same  period  as  London  men  performing  the 
same  duties,  instead  of  3  weeks  as  at  present,  the  change 
as  to  holidays  of  course  not  applying  to  present  mem- 
bers of  the  class/'^ 

The  Tweedmouth  Committee  concluded  that  the 
holidays  given  to  the  letter  sorters  and  the  telegraph- 
ists in  London  and  in  the  provincial  towns  were  ex- 
cessive. It  proposed  that  the  annual  vacation  of  21 
week  days  during  the  first  5  years  of  service  and  of 
one  month  after  5  years  of  service,  be  reduced,  to  re- 
spectively 14  week  days  and  21  week  days.  It  added: 
"It  is  not,  however,  suggested  that  this  change  should 
apply  to  those  officers  already  in  the  service  who  re- 
ceive a  leave  of  3  weeks  during  the  first  5  years,  nor 
is  it  proposed  to  curtail  the  leave  granted  to  those  offi- 
cers who  have  already  served  5  years,  and  are,  there- 
fore, in  enjoyment  of  a  month's  holiday."^ 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897,  p.   11. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Ofhce 
Establishments,   1897,  p.   18. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897,  p.  8. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  351 

Before  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 
ments, 1888,  Sir  Reginald  E.  Welby,  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury,  testified  that  throughout  the  Civil  Service 
the  Upper  Division  Clerks  had  48  working  days*  vaca- 
tion a  year,  besides  the  usual  holidays.  He  said  that 
but  for  custom,  which  had  become  "almost  common 
law,"  there  was  no  reason  for  giving  such  a  "very 
liberal"  annual  vacation.  But  he  added  that  any 
change  should  be  made  to  apply  only  to  future  entrants 
to  the  public  service.^ 

In  1892  the  Department  increased  from  21  week 
days,  to  one  calendar  month,  the  annual  leave  of  all 
men  in  the  Central  Post  Office,  London,  who  were  in 
receipt  of  $750  a  year,  or  more.  In  the  following  year, 
1893,  the  Department  gave  the  same  increase  to  men 
with  $750  a  year,  or  more,  in  the  branch  offices  of  Met- 
ropolitan London,  and  in  the  offices  of  the  provincial 
towns.  In  1895  the  representatives  of  the  men  who 
had  not  obtained  the  increase  of  annual  leave  until 
1893,  appeared  before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee 
with  the  demand  for  ten  days'  pay  by  way  of  compen- 
sation for  the  fact  that,  in  1892,  they  had  "lost  ten 
days."^ 

The  tenacity  with  which  the  civil  servants  resist  any 
change  in  the  conditions  of  service  that  is  to  their  ad- 
vantage, is  further  illustrated  by  the  following  inci- 
dents. 

^Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 
ments: q.  10,590  to  10,595. 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  4,215  and  following,  and  3,198. 


352  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Down  to  1880,  the  overseers  in  the  postal  service, 
who  are  on  their  feet  all  day,  had  one  day  a  week  of 
relief  from  duty.  In  1880  that  allowance  was  reduced 
to  half  a  day;  and  in  1893  it  was  discontinued  alto- 
gether. In  each  case  the  change  was  made  to  apply 
only  to  the  future  entrants  upon  the  office  of  overseer. 
In  1896  the  new  entrants  upon  the  office  still  were 
complying  under  protest  only  with  the  requirement  of 
the  Department  that  they  sign  a  paper  stating  that  they 
were  not  entitled  to  any  weekly  "relief  leave  of 
absence."^ 

There  are  four  Monday  Bank  Holidays  in  the  year; 
and  for  several  years  prior  to  1892,  the  Telegraph 
Branch,  as  an  act  of  grace,  gave  a  Saturday  holiday  to 
those  "news  distributors"  whose  services  could  be 
spared  on  the  Saturdays  preceding  Monday  Bank 
Holidays.  In  1892  it  ceased  to  be  possible  to  continue 
this  act  of  grace  without  employing  men  on  over  time, 
and  therefore  the  practice  was  discontinued.  In  1896 
the  news  distributors  complained  before  the  Tweed- 
mouth  Committee  that  the  withdrawal  of  "the  days  of 
grace  was  a  grievance  with  which  they  would  like  the 
Committee  to  grapple."  The  spokesman  of  the  news 
distributors  said:  "After  having  enjoyed  the  privilege 
for  [several]  years  it  was  withdrawn,  an  arbitrary 
course,  almost,  it  is  thought,  without  precedent.     To 


^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  3,631  to  3,636,  3,583,  and  4^397  and  fol- 
lowing. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  353 

grant  a  privilege,  and  then  take  it  away,  displayed  a 
lamentable  want  of  that  courtesy  that  we  think  should 
be  inseparable  qualities  of  power  and  position."^ 

In  June,  1904,  Mr.  Shackleton^  intervened  in  the 
House  of  Commons  on  behalf  of  some  men  in  the 
Intervention  by  Liverpool  Post  Office,  whose  grievance 
Members  of  was   that  an  interval   of    15   minutes, 

Parliament  ^j^^j^  ^5  »^j^  ^^^  q£  grace,"  had  been 

reduced  to  10  minutes.^ 

In  July,  1905,  Mr.  James  O'Connor,  M.  P.  for 
Wicklow,  intervened  in  a  similar  matter  on  behalf  of 
the  men  at  the  London  West  Central  District  Office.* 

Before  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 
ments, 1888,  Sir 'Lyon  Play  fair  was  asked  whether  it 
would  not  be  better  to  replace  by  boy  clerks  the  "writ- 
ers" employed  in  the  past.  Sir  Lyon  replied :  "I  think 
that  would  be  better  for  the  civil  service  and  better  for 
the  boy  clerks  themselves.  Of  course,  regard  should 
be  had  to  the  writers  who  are  employed  now,  and  the 
change  should  be  made  by  not  taking  on  more,  and  not 
by  dispensing  with  those  that  are  now  employed."  A 
moment  before.  Sir  Lyon  Playfair  hacj  been  asked: 
"The  writers  are  now  a  very  large  and  vhy  important 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on\^ost  OMce 
Establishments,  1897  ;  q.  3,037  to  3,060.  \ 

^  Who's  Who,  1905,  Shackleton,  D.  J.,  M.  P.  (Lab.),  sin^igo2. 
Secretary  of  Darwen  Weavers'  Association;   Vice-President  o>Nt;lie 
Northern  Counties  Weavers'  Amalgamation ;  Member  of  Blackbui 
Chamber   of   Commerce. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  June  6,  1904,  p.  779. 

^Hansard's  Parliamentary  Debates,  July  24,  1905,  p.  34. 
23 


354  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

body  in  the  public  service,  are  they  not?"  He  had 
repHed:  "Yes,  and  they  make  you  feel  their  largeness 
and  importance  by  Parliamentary  pressure."^  Sir 
Lyon  Playfair  had  been  Chairman  of  the  Royal  Com- 
mission on  the  Civil  Service  which  had  sat  from  1875 
to  1876;  and  he  had  been  the  author  of  the  Playfair 
Reorganization  of  the  civil  service  in  1876. 

Before  the  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Expenditure, 
1873,  Mr.  W.  E.  Baxter,  Financial  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury,  said:  ....  "but  I  may  say  at  once  in  re- 
gard to  the  matter  of  the  travelling  expenses  of  county 
court  judges,  that  I  think  the  whole  thing  has  hitherto 
been  in  such  an  unsatisfactory  state  that  it  would  be 
very  difficult  to  defend  the  action  of  the  Treasury  in 
various  matters  connected  with  it."  Thereupon  Mr. 
West,  a  Member  of  the  Committee,  queried:  "Acting 
in  accordance  with  that  view  last  year,  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  endeavored  to  reform  the  system  as 
to  existing  judges  and  as  to  future  judges,  did  he 
not?  ....  Is  that  reform  being  now  pursued  with 
regard  to  the  existing  judges?"  The  Financial  Sec- 
retary to  the  Treasury  replied:  "Not  in  regard  to 
existing  judges.  I  have  always  been  of  opinion  that 
it  is  very  difficult  to  go  back  upon  arrangements  which 
have  been  made  in  the  past,  however  injurious  to  the 
publ'C  service  and  uneconomical  they  may  have  been, 
and  that  it  would  be  better  for  economists  [persons 

*  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 
ments,  1888;  q.  20,114  and  20,115. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  355 

desiring  to  effect  economy]  to  direct  their  attention  to 
preventing  new  arrangements  of  a  similar  character."^ 

The  thoroughly  unbusinesslike  spirit  of  the  postal 

employees  is  illustrated  still  further  in  the  following 

"grievance"  laid  before  the  Tweedmouth  Committee 

,,  ,  .  ...  by  the  official  representatives  of  the 
Unbustnesshke         -^  ^ 

Spirit  Further  postal  employees,  who  Spoke,  not  as 
Illustrated  individuals,  but  as  the  instructed  repre- 

sentatives of  their  respective  classes  of  public  servants. 

Mr.  G.  McDonald  presented  the  grievance  of  the 
"news  distributors,"  who  "are  the  picked  men  of  the 
Telegraph  Service,  chosen  on  the  ground  of  exceptional 
merit."  He  complained  that  there  was  not  sufficient 
opportunity  for  promotion,  since  [the  automatic]  pro- 
motion was  limited  to  postmasterships  worth  from 
$i,ooo  to  $1,250  a  year,  and  there  were  not  enough 
postmasterships  of  that  kind.  Mr.  McDonald  ad- 
mitted that  men  under  35  years  "by  competitive  ex- 
amination," could  rise  out  of  the  class  of  News  Dis- 
tributors to  surveyors'  clerkships;  but  he  argued  that 
since  such  promotion  was  attained  by  competitive  ex- 
amination, "it  must  be  credited  to  the  man  himself  who 
wins  his  position,  and  I  therefore  beg  to  stiggest  that 
it  cannot  count  as  promotion  in  the  ordinary  sense. "^ 

Another  grievance  of  the  News  DistributorKwas 


*  Third  Report  from  the  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Expendi- 
ture, 1873;  q-  4.729  to  4.731- 

^  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897  ;  q.  3,035  and  3,065. 


356  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

that  they  were  not  "treated  and  classed"  as  Major 
Division  Clerks,  though  they  were  paid  on  the  scale  of 
such  clerks.  They  were  compelled  to  work  48  hours 
a  week,  whereas  Major  Division  Clerks  worked  only 
39  hours  a  week.^ 

Mr.  Alfred  Boulden  presented  the  telegraphists' 
grievances  as  to  pensions.  He  demanded  that  retire- 
ment on  pension  should  be  optional  at  the  age  of  fifty ; 
and  that  if  a  man  died  in  harness,  such  deduction  as 
had  been  made  from  his  salary  toward  the  pension 
fund,  should  be  paid  to  his  heir-at-law,  Mr.  H.  C. 
Fischer,  Controller  London  Central  Telegraph  Office, 
replied  that  "optional  retirement  at  50  years  of  age 
would  result  in  the  more  healthy  members  of  the  staff 
retiring  at  that  age,  and  seeking  other  employment  to 
add  to  their  income,  leaving  the  less  healthy  and  less 
useful  persons  to  hang  on  in  the  service  as  long  as  they 
could."2 

Mr.  A.  W.  North  presented  another  grievance, 
namely,  that  a  female  telegraph  clerk  can  become  a 
female  superintendent  in  21  years,  whereas  a  male 
telegraph  clerk  can  reach  the  corresponding  position 
only  after  27  years  of  service.^ 

Mr.  J   R.  Lickfold  appeared  as  the  representative 

^Keport    of  the    Inter-Departmental   Committee    on   Post    Office 

Establishments,  1897  ;  q.  2,985  and  following,  and  3,035  to  3,036. 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Establishments,  1897;  q.  2,777  and  following,  and  Appendix,  pp.  1,079 
and  1,084. 

*  Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OtHce 
Establishm.ents,  1897 ;  q.  2,576. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  357 

of  the  postal  employees  to  demand  that  in  the  case  of 
an  employee  having  failed  to  appear  for  duty,  the  De- 
The  Malingerers'  partment  should  accept  without  any  in- 
Grievance  quiry  whatever  the  medical  certificate 

of  any  physician.  At  this  time  it  was  the  practice  of  the 
Department  to  doubt  the  genuineness  of  the  illness  and 
the  hofia  fides  of  a  medical  certificate  only  in  case  "the 
man  had  a  bad  record  for  frequent  short  sick  absences/' 
* 'though  it  was  a  well  known  fact  that  private  [physi- 
cians' as  distinguished  from  departmental  physicians'] 
certificates  could  be  obtained  for  12  cents  without  even 
the  doctor  seeing  the  patient,  but  on  a  mere  statement 
of  his  symptoms  from  somebody  else."  In  support  of 
this  request,  Mr.  Lickfold,  as  the  instructed  represen- 
tative of  the  postal  employees,  could  make  no  better 
argument  than  to  cite  the  dismissal,  early  in  1894,  of 

two  railway  Post  Ofiice  sorters,  W and  J . 

In  the  evidence  in  rebuttal,  Mr.  J.  C.  Badcock,  Con- 
troller   London    Postal    Service,    gave   the    following 

account  of  the  episode  in  question.     W and  J 

were  absent  from  duty  from  January  8  to  1 1  inclusive. 
On  January  10  they  sent  in  medical  certificates  dated 
the  8th,  but  thp  date  of  one  of  the  certificates  had  ap- 
parently been  changed  from  the  9th.  W 's  land- 
lady testified  that  W and  J had  returned  to 

W 's  lodgings  on  the  8th,  shortly  after  the  depar-^ 

ture  of  the  mail  train,  saying  that  they  had  missed  the 
mail,  but  saying  nothing  of  illness.  She  added  that 
both  men  had  been  repeatedly  at  W 's  lodgings  on 


358  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  8th  and  9th.     Both  W and  J were  absent 

from  their  lodgings  during  the  greater  part  of  the 
three  days  from  the  8th  to  the  loth.     The  Post  Office 

inspector  found  J in  bed  on  the  night  of  the  loth. 

J told  him  he  had  not  seen  W since  the  6th, 

gave  evasive  answers,  and  contradicted  himself.     The 

inspector  also  found  W on  the  night  of  the  loth, 

and  gave  an  equally  unfavorable  report  upon  W 's 

answers.     On   the    nth,    the    Departmental    Medical 

Officer  found  both  men  in  W 's  room,  and  reported 

there  was  no  reason  why  both  men  should  not  have 
been  on  duty  from  the  8th  to  the  loth. 

Mr.  Spencer  Walpole,  Permanent  Secretary  of  the 
Post  Office  and  a  Member  of  the  Committee,  said  to 
the  witness:  "Have  you  any  doubt  that  the  Depart- 
ment would  not  have  taken  the  extreme  course  of  dis- 
missing any  of  its  servants  on  the  divided  opinion  of 
two  medical  men,  if  there  had  been  no  previous  cases 
against  them?  ....  These  men  are  described  as 
deliberate  malingerers?"  The  Chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee added :  "Do  you  not  think  it  would  be  wise  that 
before  bringing  forward  a  particular  case  of  this  sort, 
you  should  inform  yourself  thoroughly  as  to  the  nature 
of  the  case,  and  as  to  the  character  of  the  men  to  whom 
yoa  refer  ?"^ 

A  very  large  portion  of  the  evidence  presented  before 
the  Tweedmouth  Committee,  which  evidence  covered 

^Report  of  the  Inter-Departmental  Committee  on  Post  OMce 
Bstahlishments,  1897;  q.  671,  660  to  663,  and  1897  to  1914. 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  359 

upward  of  a  thousand  closely  printed  folio  pages, 
affords  a  melancholy  comment  upon  the  theory  which 
is  rapidly  spreading  from  the  German  Universities 
over  the  English  speaking  countries,  to  wit,  that  the 
extension  of  the  functions  of  the  State  to  the  inclusion 
of  business  enterprises  automatically  creates  a  public 
spirit  which  strengthens  the  hands  of  the  political  lead- 
ers in  charge  of  the  State,  even  to  the  point  of  enabling 
those  leaders  to  reject  the  improper  demands  made 
upon  them  by  organized  bodies  of  voters,  and  to  ad- 
minister the  State's  business  ventures  with  an  eye 
single  to  the  welfare  of  the  community  as  a  whole, 
particularly  the  long-run  interest  of  the  taxpayers. 
The  so-called  Norfolk-Hanbury  compromise,  the  ap- 
pointment and  Report  of  the  Bradford  Committee, 
and  the  appointment,  in  1906,  of  the  Select  Committee 
on  Post  Office  Servants — the  last  act  not  having  the 
support,  by  speech  or  by  vote,  of  a  single  man  of  first 
rate  importance  in  the  House  of  Commons — ^are 
melancholy  instances  of  what  that  most  discerning  of 
statesmen,  the  late  Marquis  of  Salisbury,  used  to  call 
"the  visible  helplessness  of  Governments." 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

THE  HOUSE   OF   COMMONS  STANDS   FOR 
EXTRAVAGANCE 

Authoritative  character  of  the  evidence  tendered  by  the 
several  Secretaries  of  the  Treasury.  Testimony,  in  1902,  of  Lord 
Welby,  who  had  been  in  the  Treasury  from  1856  to  1894.  Testi- 
mony of  Sir  George  H.  Murray,  Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Post 
Office  and  sometime  Private  Secretary  to  the  late  Prime  Minister, 
Mr.  Gladstone.  Testimony  of  Sir  Ralph  H.  Knox,  in  the  War 
Office  since  1882.  Testimony  of  Sir  Edward  Hamilton,  Assistant 
Secretary  to  the  Treasury  since  1894.  Testimony  of  Mr.  R. 
Chalmers,  a  Principal  Clerk  in  the  Treasury;  and  of  Sir  John 
Eldon  Gorst.  Mr.  Gladstone's  tribute  to  Joseph  Hume,  the  first 
and  last  Member  of  the  House  of  Commons  competent  to 
criticize  effectively  the  details  of  expenditure  of  the  State.  Evi- 
dence presented  before  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services 
Expenditure,  1873. 

Before  proceeding  to  the  subject  proper  of  this 
chapter,  it  is  desirable  to  say  a  word  about  the  organ- 
ization and  the  work  of  the  Treasury.^ 

The  Treasury  consists  of  the  First  Lord  of  the 
Treasury,  who  is  almost  invariably  the  Prime  Minister ; 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer;  and  three  Junior 
Lords  of  the  Treasury.     "The  Treasury  is  pre-emi- 

'The  subjoined  statements,  excepting  the  quotation  from  Mr. 
Austen  Chamberlain,  are  taken  from  A.  Todd :  On  Parliamentary 
Government  in  England. 

360 


THE  HOUSE  STANDS  FOR  EXTRAVAGANCE    361 

nently  a  superintending  and  controlling  office,  and  has 
properly  no  administrative  functions."  Its  duty  is  to 
reduce  to,  and  maintain  at,  the  minimum  compatible 
with  efficiency,  the  expenditures  of  the  several  Depart- 
ments of  State. 

The  Treasury  has  three  Secretaries :  the  Financial 
Secretary,  the  Parliamentary,  or  Patronage  Secretary, 
and  the  Permanent  Secretary.  The  Financial  Sec- 
retary, after  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  is  the 
political  head  and  conductor  of  the  Treasury.  He  is 
one  of  the  hardest  worked  officers  of  the  Government. 
His  duties  were  well  described,  recently,  by  Mr. 
Austen  Chamberlain,  in  the  course  of  a  brief  sketch  of 
his  official  career.  Said  Mr.  Chamberlain :  "From  the 
Admiralty  he  was  transferred  to  the  position  of  Finan- 
cial Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  where,  as  his  chief  ex- 
plained to  him,  he  was  in  the  position  of  an  old  poacher 
promoted  to  be  gamekeeper,  and  his  first  duty  was  to 
unlearn  the  habits  of  five  years  and  save  money  where 
previously  it  had  been  his  pleasure  to  spend  it."  The 
Parliamentary,  or  Patronage  Secretary  is  the  principal 
Government  Whip.  "He  is  a  very  useful  and  im- 
portant functionary.  His  services  are  indispensable 
to  the  Leader  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  the  control 
of  the  House  and  the  management  of  public  business." 
*Tt  devolves  upon  him,  under  the  direction  of  the 
Leader  of  the  House,  *to  facilitate,  by  mutual  under- 
standing, the  conduct  of  public  business,'  and  'the 
management  of  the  House  of  Commons,  a  position 


362  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

which  requires  consummate  knowledge  of  human  na- 
ture, the  most  amiable  flexibility,  and  complete  self- 
control.',"  As  "Whipper-in,"  the  Parliamentary 
Secretary  is  generally  assisted  by  two  of  the  Junior 
Lords  of  the  Treasury,  who  are,  at  the  same  time, 
Government  Whips.  "Those  useful  functionaries  are 
expected  to  gather  the  greatest  number  of  their  own 
party  into  every  division  [of  the  House  of  Commons] , 
and  by  persuasion,  promises,  explanation,  and  every 
available  expedient,  to  bring  their  men  from  all  quar- 
ters to  the  aid  of  the  Government  upon  any  emergency. 
It  is  also  their  business  to  conciliate  the  discontented 
and  doubtful  among  the  ministerial  supporters,  and  to 
keep  everyone,  as  far  as  possible,  in  good  humor." 
"An  estimate  of  the  importance  of  the  duties  which 
would  naturally  devolve  upon  these  functionaries — from 
the  increasing  interference  of  the  House  of  Commons 
in  matters  of  detail,  and  the  necessity  for  the  continual 
supervision  of  some  Member  of  the  Government  con- 
versant with  every  description  of  parliamentary  busi- 
ness, in  order  to  make  sure  that  the  business  is  done  in 
conformity  to  the  views  entertained  by  the  House — 
induced  Sir  Charles  Wood,^  to  declare,  in  1850,  that 
the  reduction  of  the  number  of  Junior  Lords  from  four 
to  three  was  a  very  doubtful  advantage." 

*  Sir  Charles  Wood,  first  Viscount  of  Halifax.  Private  Secretary 
to  Earl  Grey,  1830  to  1832 ;  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury, 
1832  to  1834;  Secretary  to  the  Admiralty,  1835  to  1839;  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  1846  to  1852;  President  of  the  Board  of  Control, 
1852  to  1855;  First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty,  1855  to  1858;  Secretary 
of  State  for  India,  1859  to  1866 ;  raised  to  Peerage  as  Viscount 
Halifax  in  1866;  Lord  Privy  Seal,  1870  to  1874. 


THE  HOUSE  STANDS  FOR  EXTRAVAGANCE    363 

The  Financial  Secretary  and  the  Parliamentary 
Secretary  are  political  officers,  that  is,  they  sit  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  they  change  with  every  change 
in  the  Government.  The  Permanent  Secretary,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  a  non-political  officer,  or  civil  servant, 
who  retains  office  through  the  successive  changes  of 
Government,  and  secures  the  continuity  of  the  office. 
He  is  the  official  head  of  the  Department,  and  of  the 
whole  civil  service. 

The  foregoing  facts  make  it  clear  that  for  the  pur- 
poses of  this  present  discussion,  one  can  cite  no  more 
authoritative  personages  than  the  several  Secretaries 
of  the  Treasury. 

The  Select  Committee  on  National  Expenditure,. 
1902,  took  a  great  deal  of  evidence  on  the  effect  of  the 
intervention  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  the  admin- 
istrative details  of  the  several  Departments  of  State, 
particularly  on  the  impairment  of  the  power  of  the 
Treasury  to  control  the  expenditure  of  the  several  De- 
partments. 

The  most  important  witness  was  Lord  Welby,  who, 
as  Mr.  Welby,  had  entered  the  Treasury  in  1856;  had 
Lord  Welhv  on  ^^^"  Head  of  the  Finance  Department 
Change  in  from  1 87 1  to  1885 ;  and  had  been  Per- 

PuhUc  opinion  j^anent  Secretary  from  1885  to  1894. 
Lord  Welby  said  that  in  theory  the  Treasury  had  full 
power  of  control  over  the  expenditures  of  the  several 
Departments,  but  that  in  practice  that  power  of  control 


364  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TFXEGRAPHS 

was  limited  by  the  state  of  public  opinion  as  reflected 
in  the  House  of  Commons.  As  soon  as  the  Treasury 
became  aware  that  it  had  not  public  opinion  at  its  back, 
that  fact  "would  have  a  certain  influence  on  many  of 
its  decisions."  Then  again,  as  soon  as  the  other  De- 
partments of  State  became  aware  that  the  Treasury 
was  not  supported  by  public  opinion,  the  authority  of 
the  Treasury  over  those  Departments  was  impaired. 
"If  an  idea  gets  abroad  that  the  House  of  Commons 
does  not  care  about  economy,  you  will  not  find  your 
servants  economical."  Lord  Welby  then  went  on  to 
say  that  in  all  the  political  parties  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  "the  old  spirit  of  economy  had  been  very 
much  weakened."  He  put  the  change  of  public  opin- 
ion at  about  the  middle  of  the  seventies,  or,  perhaps, 
rather  later,  say,  in  the  eighties.  Previous  to  that 
change  the  influence  of  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer 
had  been  "paramount,  or  very  powerful,  in  the  Cab- 
inet." But  with  the  change  in  public  opinion,  "the 
effective  power  of  control  in  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer  had  been  proportionately  diminished." 
Lord  Welby  concluded :  "I  constantly  hear  it  said  now 
by  people  of  great  weight  that  economy  is  impossible, 
that  you  cannot  get  the  House  of  Commons  to  pay 

attention  [to  counsels  of  economy] The  main 

object  [to  be  striven  after],  I  think,  is  that  there  should 
be  some  correlation  both  in  the  minds  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  day  and  in  the  minds  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons between  resources  and  expenditure;  I  think  that 


THE  HOUSE  STANDS  FOR  EXTRAVAGANCE    865 

ought  to  exist,  but  I  do  not  think  it  does  exist  at 
present.     I  see  no  evidence  of  it."^ 

Mr.  Hayes  Fisher,^  a  Member  of  the  Committee, 
and  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  in  1902  to 
1903,  replied  to  Lord  Welby :  "But  is  not  the  business 
of  the  Treasury,  and  the  main  business  of  the  Treasury, 
to  check  that  expenditure  and  keep  it  within  reason- 
able bounds,  outside  of  questions  of  policy?"  Lord 
Welby  replied :  "Quite  so ;  but  might  I  venture  to  ask 
the  honorable  Member,  who  occupies  one  of  the  most 
important  posts  in  the  Government,  whether  he  would 
not  be  glad  of  support  in  the  House  of  Commons?" 
"Most  certainly  we  should  on  many  occasions,"  was 
the  answer. 

Sir  George  H.  Murray,^  Permanent  Secretary  to  the 
Post  Office,  was  called  as  a  witness  because  "in  the 
official  posts  he  had  held,  particularly  as  Private  Sec- 
retary to  the  late  Prime  Minister,  Mr.  Gladstone,  he 
had  had  frequent  opportunities  for  observation  not 
only  of  the  reasons  for  expenditure,  but  of  the  control 
exercised   over   it   in   Parliament."     He   said :  .  .  .  . 

*  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  National  Expenditure, 
1902;  q.  2,516  to  2,605. 

*  Who's  Who,  1905,  Fisher,  Wm.  Hayes,  M.  P.,  Financial  Secre- 
tary to  the  Treasury,  1902-1903  ;  Junior  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  and 
a  Ministerial  Whip,  1895  to  1902;  Hon.  Private  Secretary  to  Sir 
Michael  Hicks-Beach,  1886  to  1887;  and  to  Right  Honorable  A.  J. 
Balfour,  1887  to  1892. 

^  Who's  Who,  1904,  Murray,  Sir  G.  H.,  Joint  Permanent  Under 
Secretary  to  the  Treasury  since  1903.  Entered  the  Foreign  Office, 
1873;  transferred  to  Treasury,  1880;  Private  Secretary  to  Right 
Honorable  W.  E.  Gladstone  and  to  Earl  of  Rosebery,  when  Prime 
Minister :  Chairman  Board  of  Inland  Revenue,  1897  to  1899  >  Sec- 
retary to  the  Post  Office,  1899  to  1903. 


366  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

"But  I  think  the  whole  attitude  of  the  House  itself 
toward  the  pubHc  service  and  toward  expenditure  gen- 
erally, has  undergone  a  very  material 
Sir  George  H.  ^'    ,       ^  ^  . 

Murray  on  change  in  the  present  generation.  .  .  . 

Change  in  Of  course,  the  House  to  this  day,  in 

Public  opinion  ^^^  abstract  and  in  theory,  is  very 
strongly  in  favor  of  economy,  but  I  am  bound  to  say 
that  in  practice  Members,  both  in  their  corporate 
capacity  and,  still  more,  in  their  individual  capacity, 
are  more  disposed  to  use  their  influence  with  the 
Executive  Government  in  order  to  increase  expenditure 

than  to  reduce  it That  is  the  policy  of  the 

House — to  spend  more  money  than  it  did,  to  criticize 
expenditure  less  closely  than  it  did,  and  to  urge  the 
Executive  Government  to  increase  expenditure  instead 
of  the  reverse."^ 

Sir  Ralph  H.  Knox,^  who  had  been  in  the  War 
Office  from  1856  to  1901,  and  who,  for  forty  years, 
had  listened  to  the  discussions  in  Parliament  of  the 
The  Commons  Estimates  of  Expenditure,  said:  .  .  .  . 
the  Champion  of  "The  mass  of  Speeches  that  are  made 
Chss  Interests  j^  g^^ppjy  ^^^^^^  ^^^  jjouse  of  Com- 
mons, are  speeches  made  on  behalf  of  those  who 
have  grievances,  their  friends  or  constituents,  or  those 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  National  Expenditure, 
1902;  q.  1,631  to  1,673,  and  1,730  to  1,732. 

*  Who's  Who,  1904,  Knox,  Sir  Ralph  H.,  entered  War  Office  in 
1856;  Accountant-General,  War  Office,  1882  to  1897;  Permanent 
Under-Secretary  of  State  for  War,  1897  to  1901  ;  a  Member  of  the 
Committee  which  worked  out  Lord  Cardwell's  Army  Reform,  and  of 
the  Royal  Commission  on  Indian  Financial  Relations,  1896;  Civil. 
Service  Superannuations,  1902;  and  MiUtig^^  ?nd  Volunteers,  1903. 


THE  HOUSE  STANDS  FOR  EXTRAVAGANCE  367 

with  whom  they  work,  or  in  whom  they  are  particularly 
interested.  If  you  take  speech  after  speech,  you  find 
they  are  simply  to  the  efifect:  Sve  want  more* — and 

they  get  more In  former  days  there  were  more 

Members  who  were  willing  to  get  up  with  some 
pertinence  and  some  knowledge  to  criticize  those  pro- 
posals. But  I  cannot  say  there  has  been  any  very  great 
tendency  in  that  direction  when  details  are  being  dis- 
cussed  What  I  want,  is  [someone]  to  nip  in 

the  bud,  new  proposals  which  are  made  by  Members 
of  Parliament  very  often  on  behalf  of  their  constitu- 
ents. A  Member,  for  instance,  represents  what  I 
should  call  a  labor  borough;  he  gets  up  and  proposes 
that  the  pay  of  every  man  employed  in  certain  [Gov- 
ernment] factories  or  dockyards  should  be  increased 
by  so  much  a  week,  what  I  want  is  somebody  to  get 
up  and  say:  That  is  not  the  view  of  the  country,  you 
must  not  accept  that;'  but  instead  of  that  the  matter 
goes  sub  silentio,  and  the  Government,  which  is  natu- 
rally interested  in  economy  and  in  keeping  the  expendi- 
ture down,  is  induced  to  think  if  there  is  any  feeling  in 
the  House  at  all,  it  is  in  favor  of  doubling  everybody's 
pay."  Sir  R.  H.  Knox  said  he  desired  more  opposi- 
tion to  unwarranted  proposals,  "because  I  know  what 
extreme  weight  is  attached  to  the  speeches  in  Supply 
by  the  Minister  in  charge  of  a  Department,  and  by  the 
Department  itself;  but  if  they  find  that  there  is  not  a 
i^ingJe  man  interested  in  economy  when  the  details  of 


368  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

the  Estimates  are  discussed,  it  places  them  in  an  ex- 
ceedingly difficult  position."^ 

Sir  Edward  Hamilton,  Assistant  Secretary  to  the 
Treasury  since  1894,  said  that  the  Treasury  could 
depend  less  than  formerly  upon  the  support  of  the 
Commons  De-  House  of  Commons,  and  that  often- 
bates  weaken  times  the  tendency  of  the  debates  in 
Treasury's  Hands  ^i^^  fjouse  was  to  weaken  the  hands  of 
the  Treasury.^  Sir  Edward  Hamilton  had  entered 
the  Treasury  in  1870;  had  served  as  Private  Secretary 
to  Mr.  Lowe,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  in  1872- 
73;  and  as  Private  Secretary  to  Mr.  Gladstone,  First 
Lord  of  the  Treasury,  in  1880  to  1885.  He  had  been 
made  successively  Principal  Clerk  of  the  Finance 
Division  in  1885 ;  Assistant  Financial  Secretary  in 
1892;  and  Assistant  Secretary  in  1894.  In  1902  he 
was  made  Permanent  Financial  Secretary. 

Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  a  member  of  the  Select 
Committee,  asked  Mr.  R.  Chalmers,^  a  Principal  Clerk 
at  the  Treasury:  "Is  it  within  your  experience  as  an 
official  of  the  Treasury  that  Ministers  of  other  Depart- 
ments not  infrequently  represent,  as  the  reason  for  al- 
lowing expenditure,  the  strong  pressure  that  has  been 
put  upon  them  in  the  House  of  Commons?"  "Yes; 
I  have  seen  repeated  instances  of  that."     "And  their 

"^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  National  Expenditure, 
1902;  q.  1,567  to  1,569,  and  1,823  to  1,825. 

^Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  National  Expenditure, 
T902 ;  q.  2,081  to  2,084. 

In    1905    Mr.    Chalmers    was    made    Assistant- Secretary   to    the 
Treasury. 


THE  HOUSE  STANDS  FOR  EXTRAVAGANCE    369 

inability  to  resist  that  pressure  for  another  year?" 
"Yes."i 

Sir  John  Eldon  Gorst,  M.  P.,  a  man  of  large  ex- 
perience of  the  Public  Service,  said  he  had  no  doubt 
that  in  all  offices  there  were  officers  who  had  ceased  to 
have  anything  to  do;  and  that  was  particularly  true  of 
the  Education  Department,  where  there  was  much 
reading  of  newspapers,  and  much  literary  composition. 
He  had  "even  heard  of  rooms  where  Ping  Pong  was 
played,  there  being  nothing  else  to  do  at  the  moment." 
Sir  John  Eldon  Gorst  continued :  "The  Treasury  has 
power  to  make  an  inquiry  into  every  Office,  it  could 
institute  an  inquiry  to  see  whether  the  office  was  or 
was  not  economically  managed,  but  so  far  as  I  know 
that  power  never  has  been  exercised.  It  would  be  very 
difficult  indeed  for  the  Parliamentary  Head  of  a  De- 
partment to  call  in  the  Treasury  for  such  an  investiga- 
tion. It  would  make  the  Parliamentary  head  extreme- 
ly unpopular.  The  only  person  who,  in  my  opinion,  as 
things  are,   can  really  influence  the  expenses  of  an 

office,  is  the  Civil  Service  head But  although 

the  Civil  Service  head  of  the  office  has  a  very  great 
motive  to  make  his  office  efficient,  because  his  own 
credit  and  his  own  future  depend  on  the  efficiency  of 
his  office,  he  has  comparatively  little  motive  for 
economy.  Parliament  certainly  does  not  thank  him; 
I  do  not  know  whether  the  Treasury  thanks  him  very 

'  Report  from   the  Select  Committee  on   National  Expenditure, 
1902;  q.  615  to  618. 
24 


370  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

much ;  certainly  his  colleagues  do  not  thank  him ;  .  .  .  . 
and  the  natural  disposition  of  a  man  to  let  well  enough 
alone  renders  him  reluctant  to  take  upon  himself  the 
extremely  ungrateful  task  of  making  his  office,  not  only 
an  efficient  one,  but  also  an  economical  one.  I  think 
anybody  who  has  any  experience  of  mercantile  offices, 
such  as  a  great  insurance  office,  or  anything  of  that 
kind,  would  be  struck  directly  with  the  different 
atmosphere  which  prevails  in  a  mercantile  office  and  a 
Government  office I  have  no  hesitation  in  say- 
ing that  any  large  insurance  company,  or  any  large 
commercial  office  of  any  kind,  is  worked  far  more 
efficiently  and  far  more  economically  than  the  best  of 
the  Departments  of  His  Majesty's  Government."* 

Sir  John  Eldon  Gorst's  statement  that  he  knew  of 
no  instance  of  the  Treasury  exercising  its  power  of 
instituting  an  inquiry  conducted  by  Treasury  officers, 
into  the  administration  of  a  Department  of  State,  re- 
calls to  mind  some  testimony  given  by  Sir  R.  E.  Welby, 
Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  before  the  Royal 
Commission  on  Civil  Establishments,  1888.  Mr. 
Cleghorn,  a  Member  of  that  Commission,  asked  Sir 
R.  E.  Welby :  "Is  there  anybody  at  the  Treasury,  for 
instance,  who  could  say  to  the  Board  of  Trade,  or  any 
other  particular  Department:  *You  have  too  many 
clerks,  you  must  reduce  them  by  ten?'  Is  there  any- 
body at  the  Treasury  with  sufficient  power  and  knowl- 

^  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  National  Expenditure, 
1892;  q.  2,406  to  2,419,  and  2,502. 


THE  HOUSE  STANDS  FOR  EXTRAVAGANCE    371 

edge  of  the  work  to  be  in  a  position  to  say  that,  and 
to  take  the  responsibility  of  it?"  Sir  R.  E.  Welby 
replied:  *'No."  Thereupon  Mr.  R.  W.  Hanbury, 
another  Member  of  the  Commission,  asked:  "There 
is  not?"     Once  more  the  answer  was:  "No."^ 

Again,  in  1876,  before  the  Select  Committee  on  Post 
Office  Telegraph  Departments,  Mr.  Julian  Goldsmid, 
a  Member  of  the  Committee,  asked  Mr.  S.  A.  Black- 
wood, Financial  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office:  "You 
would  not  like,  perhaps,  to  give  the  reasons  for  that 
enormous  overmanning  which  existed  in  some  of  the 
[telegraph]  offices  [in  1873  to  1875]  ?"  Mr.  Black- 
wood replied:  "I  am  not  acquainted  with  the  reasons 
myself."^ 

Sir  Ralph  H.  Knox,  in  the  course  of  his  testimony, 
had  quoted  Mr.  Bagehot^s  statement :  "If  you  want  to 
raise  a  certain  cheer  in  the  House  of  Commons,  make 
a  general  panegyric  on  economy ;  if  you  want  to  invite 
a  sure  defeat,  propose  a  particular  saving."  He  had 
continued :  "I  should  like  to  add,  'If  you  want  to  lose 
popularity,  oppose  the  proposals  for  increase.'  There 
ought  to  be  some  Members  in  the  House  of  Commons 
who  would  undertake  that  line." 

This  wish  of  Sir  Ralph  H.  Knox  recalls  to  mind 
the  tribute  paid,  in  1873,  by  Mr.  Gladstone,  to  the 
memory  of  Joseph  Hume,  the  first  as  well  as  the  last 

*  Second  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Civil  Establish- 
ments, 1888;  q.  10,683  to  10,684. 

'Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Post  Office  {Telegraph 
Department),  1876;  q.  5,397  to  S.600. 


872  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Member  of  the  House  of  Commons  to  acquire  a 
knowledge  of  the  expenditures  of  the  Government 
which  was  sufficient  to  enable  the  possessor  to  criticize 
with  intelligence  the  details  of  the  expenditures  of  the 
Government.  Said  Mr.  Gladstone:  ....  "and  in 
like  manner,  I  believe  that  Mr.  Hume  has  earned  for 
himself  an  honorable  and  a  prominent  place  in  the 
history  of  this  country — not  by  endeavoring  to  pledge 
Gladstone's  Parliament   to   abstract   resolutions   or 

Tribute  to  Hume  general  declarations  on  the  subject  of 
economy,  but  by  an  indefatigable  and  unwearied  de- 
votion, by  the  labor  of  a  life,  to  obtain  complete  mastery 
of  all  the  details  of  public  expenditure,  and  by  tracking, 
and  I  would  almost  say  hunting,  the  Minister  in  every 
Department  through  all  these  details  with  a  knowledge 
equal  or  superior  to  his  own.  In  this  manner,  I  do 
not  scruple  to  say,  Mr.  Hume  did  more,  not  merely  to 
reduce  the  public  expenditure  as  a  matter  of  figures, 
but  to  introduce  principles  of  economy  into  the  man- 
agement of  the  administration  of  public  money,  than 
all  the  men  who  have  lived  in  our  time  put  together. 
This  is  the  kind  of  labor,  which,  above  all  things,  we 
want.  I  do  not  know  whether  my  honorable  and 
learned  friend  [Mr.  Vernon  Harcourt],  considering 
his  distinguished  career  in  his  profession,  is  free  to 
devote  himself  to  the  public  service  in  the  same  way  as 
Mr.  Hume  did.  If,  however,  he  is  free  to  do  so,  I 
would  say  to  him:  *By  all  means  apply  yourself  to 
this  vocation.     You  will  find  it  extremely  disagree- 


THE  HOUSE  STANDS  FOR  EXTRAVAGANCE    373 

able.  You  will  find  that  during  your  lifetime  very 
little  distinction  is  to  be  gained  in  it,  but  in  the  impar- 
tiality of  history  and  of  posterity  you  will  be  judged 
very  severely  in  the  scales  of  absolute  justice  as  regards 
the  merits  of  public  men,  and  you  will  then  obtain  your 
reward.'  "^ 

The  British  public,  needless  to  say,  still  is  waiting 
for  the  man,  or  men,  who  shall  take  upon  themselves 
the  invidious  but  honorable  task  of  stemming  the  tide 
to  extravagant  expenditure,  which,  in  Great  Britain, 
as  elsewhere,  is  the  besetting  sin  of  popular  govern- 
ment. The  British  people  still  are  waiting,  though, 
since  1870,  they  have  vastly  increased  the  functions  of 
the  Government  by  nationalizing  a  great  branch  of 
industry,  and  therefore  are  more  than  ever  in  need  of 
persons  who  shall  emulate  the  late  Joseph  Hume. 

In  conclusion,  let  us  compare  with  the  testimony 
given  in  1902,  the  testimony  given  in  1873,  before  the 
Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Expenditure. 

A  Member  of  the  Select  Committee  of  1873  asked 
Mr.  W.  E.  Baxter,  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury : 
"Am  I  right  in  thinking  that  you  do  not  agree  with 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer's  declaration  with  re- 
gard to  the  Treasury?  I  asked  him  this  question: 
'Then  it  is  a  popular  delusion  to  believe  that  the  Treas- 
ury does  exercise  a  direct  control  over  the  expenditure 


^Hansard's   Parliamentary   Debates,   February    18,    1873,   P-   632 
and  following. 


374  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

of  the  Department?'  And  the  Chancellor  replied:  *I 
do  not  know  that  it  is  popular,  but  it  is  a  delusion;  I 
think  that  it  would  be  much  more  popular  that  the 
Treasury  should  exercise  no  control  at  all.'  "  Mr. 
Baxter  replied:  "I  think  that  the  Chancellor  stated  it 
too  broadly,  and  would,  probably,  if  he  had  been  Secre- 
tary to  the  Treasury  for  two  or  three  years,  have 
found  that  the  Treasury  did,  in  point  of  fact,  go  back 
to  some  extent  over  the  old  expenditure  as  well  as  try 
to  stop  increases."  A  moment  before,  Mr.  Baxter  had 
said:  "The  most  unpleasant  part,  as  I  find  it,  of  the 
duty  of  the  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury  is  to 
resist  the  constant  pressure  brought  day  by  day,  and 
almost  hour  by  hour,  by  Members  of  Parliament,  in 
order  to  increase  expenditure  by  increasing  the  pay  of 
individuals,  increasing  the  pay  of  classes,  and  granting 
large  compensations  to  individuals  or  to  classes."  The 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  queried:  ''And  that  pres- 
sure, which  is  little  known  to  the  public,  has  given  you, 
and  your  predecessors  in  office,  I  presume,  a  great  deal 
of  thought  and  a  great  deal  of  concern  ?"  Mr.  Baxter 
replied:  "As  I  said  before,  it  is  the  most  unpleasant 
part  of  my  duties,  and  it  occupies  a  very  great  deal  of 
time  which  probably  might  be  better  spent."  At  this 
point  Mr.  Sclater-Booth  asked:  "You  spoke  of  the 
constant  Parliamentary  pressure  which  has  been  exer- 
cised with  a  view  to  increasing  salaries  or  compensa- 
tions, do  you  allude  to  proceedings  in  Parliament  as 
well  as  private  communications,  or  only  to  the  latter  ?" 


THE  HOUSE  STANDS  FOR  EXTRAVAGANCE    375 

Mr.  Baxter  replied :  "I  did  in  my  answer  only  allude  to 
private  communications  by  letter  and  conversation  in 
the  House,  because  that  was  in  my  mind  at  the  time. 
But  of  course  my  answer  might  be  extended  to  those 
motions  in  the  House  which  are  resisted  without  effect 
by  the  Government,  and  which  entail  great  expendi- 
ture upon  the  country."  Mr.  Herman  queried :  "When 
you  speak  of  the  pressure  put  upon  you  by  Members 
of  Parliament  for  the  increase  of  pay  to  classes,  and 
the  other  points  that  you  named,  I  suppose  that  you 
mean  that  it  is  partly  party  pressure,  and  that  you  are 
more  subject  to  it  at  the  present  time  than  you  would 
be  if  a  Conservative  Government  were  in  power?" 
Mr.  Baxter  replied :  *'In  my  experience  it  has  very  little 
to  do  with  party ;  men  from  all  quarters  of  the  House 
are  at  me  from  week  to  week."  "Do  you  mean  to  say 
that  men  opposed  to  you  in  political  principles  apply  to 
you  for  that  sort  of  thing  now?"  "Certainly  I  should 
wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood  that  they  do  not  ask 
this  as  a  favor ;  they  do  not  ask  favors  of  me.  They 
simply  wish  me  to  look  into  the  question  of  the  pay  of 
individuals  and  of  classes  of  individuals,  as  they  put  it, 

with  a  view  of  benefitting  the  public  service 

In  very  few  instances  since  I  have  been  Financial  Sec- 
retary to  the  Treasury  have  I  been  asked  by  anyone 
to  advance  a  friend,  or  to  do  anything  in  the  shape  of 
a  favor.  The  representations  are  of  this  sort:  'Here 
are  a  class  of  public  officers  who  are  underpaid.  We 
wish  you  to  look  into  the  matter,  and  to  consider 


376  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

whether  or  not  it  would  be  advantageous  to  the  public 
service  that  their  salary  should  be  increased.'  I  look 
into  it,  and  I  say  that  I  am  not  at  all  of  that  opinion, 
upon  which  my  friend  tells  me  that  he  will  bring  the 
matter  before  the  House,  and  show  us  up."  "And  the 
other  evil  is  one  which  is  rapidly  diminishing,  and,  in 
fact,  is  very  small  now,  namely,  interference  in  favor 
of  individuals?"     "Very  small  indeed." 

To  a  question  from  Mr.  Rathbone,  Mr.  Baxter  re- 
plied: "I  do  not  think  that  the  representations  in 
question  have  much  effect ;  I  only  stated  that  the  most 
unpleasant  part  of  my  duties  was  resisting  the  pressure 
brought  to  bear  in  that  way."  Thereupon  Mr.  Rath- 
bone  continued :  "They  may  not  have  an  effect  when 
the  Government  has  a  majority  of  one  hundred  or  so, 
or  when  there  is  no  election  impending,  but  do  you 
think  they  have  no  effect  when,  as  we  have  seen  in 
former  years  for  long  periods,  the  Government  is  car- 
ried on,  whether  by  one  side  or  the  other,  by  a  very 
small  majority,  or  when  an  election  is  impending?" 
Mr.  Baxter  replied:  "I  have  no  doubt  that  they  have 
had  the  effect  in  former  times  in  those  circumstances." 
"Do  you  think  they  would  be  liable  to  have  that  effect 
again  if  either  party  should  be  reduced  to  that  condi- 
tion?" "It  may  be  so."  "Can  you  suggest  any  mode 
of  abating  the  Parliamentary  pressure  to  which  you 
have  alluded,  whether  it  be  exercised  by  public  motions 
or  by  private  influence?"  The  Financial  Secretary 
to  the  Treasury  replied :  "No ;  it  is  an  evil  very  difficult 


THE  HOUSE  STANDS  FOR  EXTRAVAGANCE    377 

to  remedy.  I  think  the  better  plan  would  be  to  inform 
the  constituencies  on  the  subject  and  let  them  know 
the  practice  which  so  widely  prevails,  in  order  that,  if 
inclined  to  take  the  side  of  economy,  they  may  look 
after  their  Members  of  Parliament."  A  moment 
later,  Mr.  Sclater-Booth  asked:  "Do  you  not  think 
from  what  you  have  seen  of  the  public  service,  that  the 
Treasury,  existing  particularly  for  that  purpose,  is  the 
body  which  must  be  permanently  relied  upon  to  keep 
down  expenditure?"  ''Decidedly  so."  "Even  the 
constituencies  can  scarcely,  as  a  rule,  be  appealed  to  in 
that  sense,  can  they  ?"  "No ;  I  attach  very  much  more 
importance  to  the  power  of  the  Treasury  than  either  to 
the  action  of  the  House  of  Commons,  or,  I  am  sorry 
to  say,  to  the  voice  of  the  constituencies."^ 

*  Third  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  Civil  Services  Ex- 
penditure, 1873 ;  q*  4*672  to  4,768. 


CHAPTER  XIX 
CONCLUSION 

A  LARGE  and  ever  increasing  number  of  us  are  ad- 
herents of  the  political  theory  that  the  extension  of  the 
functions  of  the  State  to  the  inclusion  of  the  conduct 
of  business  ventures  will  purify  politics  and  make  the 
citizen  take  a  more  intelligent  as  well  as  a  more  active 
part  in  public  affairs.  The  verdict  of  the  experience 
of  Great  Britain  under  the  public  ownership  and  oper- 
ation of  the  telegraphs  is  that  that  doctrine  is  untenable. 
Instead  of  purifying  politics,  public  ownership  has  cor- 
rupted them.  It  has  given  a  great  impetus  to  class- 
bribery,  a  form  of  corruption  far  more  insidious  than 
individual  bribery.  With  one  exception,  wherever  the 
public  ownership  of  the  telegraphs  has  affected  the 
pocket-book  interests  of  any  considerable  body  of 
voters,  the  good-will  of  those  voters  has  been  gained  at 
the  expense  of  the  public  purse.  The  only  exception 
has  been  the  policy  pursued  toward  the  owners  of  the 
telephone  patents;  and  even  in  that  case  the  policy 
adopted  was  not  dictated  by  legitimate  motives. 

The  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs  was  initiated 
with  class  bribery.  The  telegraph  companies  had  been 
poor  politicians,  and  had  failed  to  conciliate  the  news- 

378 


CONCLUSION  379 

paper  press  by  allowing  the  newspapers  to  organize 
their  own  news  bureaux.  The  Government  played  the 
game  of  politics  much  better;  it  gave  the  newspapers 
a  tariff  which  its  own  advisor,  Mr.  Scudamore,  said 
would  prove  unprofitable.  No  subsequent  Government 
has  attempted  to  abrogate  the  bargain,  though  the 
annual  loss  to  the  State  now  is  upward  of  $1,500,000. 

The  promise  to  extend  the  telegraphs  to  every  place 
with  a  money  order  issuing  Post  Office  was  given  in 
ignorance  of  what  it  would  cost  to  carry  out  that  prom- 
ise. But  the  adherence  to  the  policy  until  an  antici- 
pated expenditure  of  $1,500,000  had  risen  to  $8,500,- 
000  was  nothing  more  nor  less  than  the  purchase  of 
votes  out  of  the  public  purse.  Not  until  1873  did  the 
Government  abandon  the  policy  that  every  place  with 
a  money  order  issuing  Post  Office  was  entitled  to  tele- 
graphic service. 

When  the  House  of  Commons,  in  March,  1883, 
against  the  protests  of  the  Government  passed  the  reso- 
lution which  demanded  that  the  tariff  on  telegrams  be 
cut  almost  in  two,  the  Government  should  have  resigned 
rather  than  carry  out  the  order.  The  Government's 
obedience  to  an  order  which  the  Government  itself  con- 
tended would  put  a  heavy  burden  on  the  taxpayer  for 
four  years,  was  nothing  more  nor  less  than  the  purchase 
of  Parliamentary  support  out  of  the  public  purse.  No 
serious  argument  had  been  advanced  that  the  charge 
of  24  cents  for  20  words  was  excessive.  The  argu- 
ment of  the  leader  of  the  movement  for  reduction,  Dr. 


380  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Cameron,  of  Glasgow,  was  a  worthy  complement  to 
the  argument  made  in  1868  by  Mr.  Hunt,  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer,  to  wit,  that  telegraphing  ought  to  be 
made  so  cheap  that  the  illiterate  man  who  could  not 
write  a  letter  would  send  a  telegram.  Dr.  Cameron 
argued  that  "instead  of  maintaining  a  price  which  was 
prohibitory  not  only  to  the  working  classes  but  also  to 
the  middle  classes,  they  ought  to  take  every  means  to 
encourage  telegraphy.  They  ought  to  educate  the 
rising  generation  to  it;  and  he  would  suggest  to  the 
Government  that  the  composing  of  telegrams  would 
form  a  useful  part  of  the  education  in  our  board 
schools." 

Parliament  after  Parliament,  and  Government  after 
Government  has  purchased  out  of  the  public  purse  the 
good-will  of  the  telegraph  employees.  Organized  in 
huge  civil  servants'  unions,  the  telegraph  employees 
have  been  permitted  to  establish  the  policy  that  wages 
and  salaries  shall  be  fixed  in  no  small  degree  by  the 
amount  of  political  pressure  that  the  telegraph  em- 
ployees can  bring  to  bear  on  Members  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  With  the  rest  of  the  Government  em- 
ployees they  have  been  permitted  to  establish  the  doc- 
trine that  once  a  man  has  landed  himself  on  the  State's 
pay-roll,  he  has  "something  very  nearly  approaching 
to  a  freehold  of  provision  for  life,"  irrespective  of  his 
fitness  and  his  amenableness  to  discipline,  and  no 
matter  what  labor-saving  machines  may  be  invented, 
or  how  much  business  may  fall  off.     To  a  considerable 


CONCLUSION  381 

degree  the  State  employees  have  established  their  de- 
mand that  promotion  be  made  according  to  seniority 
rather  than  merit.  In  more  than  one  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral have  they  instilled  "a  perfect  horror  of  passing 
anyone  over."  Turning  to  one  part  of  the  service, 
one  finds  the  civil  service  unions  achieving  the  revoca- 
tion of  the  promotion  of  the  man  denominated  "prob- 
ably the  ablest  man  in  the  Sheffield  Post  Office."  Turn- 
ing to  another  part  of  the  service,  one  finds  the 
Postmaster  General,  Mr.  Raikes,  "for  the  good  of  the 
service"  telling  an  exceptionally  able  man  that  "he  can 
well  afford  to  wait  his  turn."  The  civil  servants,  in 
the  telegraph  service  and  elsewhere,  to  a  considerable 
degree  have  secured  to  themselves  exemption  from  the 
rigorous  discipline  to  which  must  submit  the  people 
who  are  in  the  service  of  private  individuals  and  of 
companies.  Finally,  the  civil  servants  have  been  per- 
mitted to  establish  to  a  greater  or  a  lesser  degree  a 
whole  host  of  demands  that  are  inconsistent  with  the 
economical  conduct  of  business.  Among  them  may 
be  mentioned  the  demand  that  the  standard  of  efficiency 
may  not  be  raised  without  reimbursement  to  those  who 
take  the  trouble  to  come  up  to  the  new  standard ;  that 
if  a  man  enters  the  service  when  the  proportion  of 
higher  officers  to  the  rank  and  file  is  i  to  lo,  he  has 
"an  implied  contract"  with  the  Government  that  that 
proportion  shall  not  be  altered  to  his  disadvantage 
though  it  may  be  altered  to  his  advantage. 


382  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

Public  opinion  has  compelled  the  great  Political 
Parties  to  drop  Party  politics  with  regard  to  the  State 
employees,  and  to  give  them  security  of  tenure  of  office. 
But  it  permits  the  State  employees  to  engage  in  Party 
politics  towards  Members  of  Parliament.  The  civil 
service  unions  watch  the  speeches  and  votes  of  Mem- 
bers of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  send  speakers  and 
campaign  workers  into  the  districts  of  offending  Mem- 
bers. In  the  election  campaigns  they  ask  candidates 
to  pledge  themselves  to  support  in  Parliament  civil 
servants'  demands.  Their  political  activities  have  led 
Mr.  Hanbury,  Financial  Secretary  to  the  Treasury  in 
1895  to  1900,  to  say :  "We  must  recognize  the  fact  that 
in  this  House  of  Commons,  public  servants  have  a 
Court  of  Appeal  such  as  exists  with  regard  to  no 
private  employee  whatever.  It  is  a  Court  of  Appeal 
which  exists  not  only  with  regard  to  the  grievances  of 
classes,  and  even  of  individuals,  but  it  is  a  Court  of 
Appeal  which  applies  even  to  the  wages  and  duties  of 
classes  and  individuals,  and  its  functions  in  that 
respect  are  only  limited  by  the  common  sense  of  Mem- 
bers, who  should  exercise  caution  in  bringing  forward 
cases  of  individuals,  because,  if  political  influence  is 
brought  to  bear  in  favor  of  one  individual,  the  chances 

are  that  injury  is  done  to  some  other  individual 

We  have  done  away  with  personal  and  individual  brib- 
ery, but  there  is  still  a  worse  form  of  bribery,  and  that 
is  when  a  man  asks  a  candidate  [for  Parliament]  to 
buy  his  vote  out  of  the  public  purse."     The  tactics 


CONCLUSION  383 

employed  by  civil  servants  have  led  the  late  Postmaster 
General,  Lord  Stanley,  to  apply  the  terms  "blackmail" 
and  "blood-sucking."  The  conduct  of  the  House  of 
Commons  under  civil  service  pressure  has  led  Mr.  A. 
J.  Balfour,  the  late  Premier,  to  express  grave  anxiety 
concerning  the  future  of  Great  Britain's  civil  service. 
It  has  led  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  Representative  of 
the  Postmaster  General,  to  say  that  Members  of  both 
Parties  had  come  to  him  seeking  protection  from  the 
demands  made  upon  them  by  the  civil  servants.  On  an- 
other occasion  it  has  led  Mr.  Chamberlain  to  say :  "In 
a  great  administration  like  this  there  must  be  decen- 
tralization, and  how  difficult  it  is  to  decentralize,  either 
in  the  Post  Office  or  in  the  Army,  v^hen  working  under 
constant  examination  by  question  and  answer  in  this 
House,  no  Honorable  Member  who  has  not  had  ex- 
perience of  official  life  can  easily  realize.  But  there 
must  be  decentralization,  because  every  little  petty 
matter  cannot  be  dealt  with  by  the  Postmaster  General 
or  the  Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Post  Office.  Their 
attention  should  be  reserved  in  the  main  for  large  ques- 
tions, and  I  think  it  is  deplorable,  absolutely  deplorable, 
that  so  much  of  their  time  should  be  occupied,  as  under 
the  present  circumstances  it  necessarily  is  occupied, 
with  matters  of  very  small  detail  because  these  matters 
of  detail  are  asked  by  Honorable  Members  and  be- 
cause we  do  not  feel  an  Honorable  Member  will  accept 
an  answer  from  anyone  but  the  highest  authority.  I 
think  a  third  of  the  time — I  am  putting  it  at  a  low 


384  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

estimate — of  the  highest  officials  in  the  Post  Office  is 
occupied  in  answering  questions  raised  by  Members 
of  this  House,  and  in  providing  me  with  information 
in  order  that  I  may  be  in  a  position  to  answer  the  in- 
quiries addressed  to  me"  about  matters  which  "in  any 
private  business  would  be  dealt  with  by  the  officer  on 
the  spot,  without  appeal  or  consideration  unless  griev- 
ous cause  were  shown." 

The  questions  of  which  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain 
spoke,  at  one  end  of  the  scale  are  put  on  behalf  of  a 
man  discharged  for  theft,  at  the  other  end  of  the  scale 
on  behalf  of  the  man  who  fears  he  will  not  be  pro- 
moted. The  practice  of  putting  such  questions  not  only 
leads  to  deplorable  waste  of  executive  ability,  it  also 
modifies  profoundly  the  entire  administration  of  the 
public  service.  Lord  Welby,  the  highest  authority  in 
Great  Britain,  in  1902  testified  that  it  was  the  function 
of  the  Treasury  to  hold  the  various  Departments  up 
to  efficient  and  economical  administration.  But  that 
the  debates  in  the  Commons  not  only  weakened  the 
Treasury's  control  over  the  several  Departments,  but 
also  made  the  Treasury  lower  its  standards  of  efficiency 
and  economy.  He  added  that  in  the  last  twenty  or 
twenty-five  years  both  Parties  had  lost  a  great  deal 
of  "the  old  spirit  of  economy,"  and  that  at  the  same 
time  "the  effective  power  of  control  in  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  had  been  proportionately  dimin- 
ished." In  former  times  the  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer had  been  "paramount,  or  very  powerful  in  the 


CONCLUSION  385 

Cabinet."  Upon  the  same  occasion,  Sir  George  H. 
Murray  was  called  to  testify,  because  "in  the  official 
posts  he  had  held,  particularly  as  Private  Secretary  to 
the  late  Prime  Minister,  Mr.  Gladstone,  he  had  had 
frequent  opportunities  for  observation  not  only  of  the 
reasons  for  expenditure,  but  of  the  control  exercised 
over  it  in  Parliament."  Sir  George  H.  Murray  said: 
"But  J,  think  the  whole  attitude  of  the  House  itself 
toward  the  public  service  and  toward  expenditure 
generally,  has  undergone  a  very  material  change  in  the 
present  generation. ....  Of  course,  the  House  to  this 
day,  in  the  abstract  and  in  theory,  is  very  strongly  in 
favor  of  economy,  but  I  am  bound  to  say  that  in  prac- 
tice Members,  both  in  their  corporate  capacity  and,  still 
more,  in  their  individual  capacity,  are  more  disposed  to 
use  their  influence  with  the  Executive  Government  in 
order  to  increase  expenditure  than  to  reduce  it."  Sir 
John  Eldon  Gorst  testified  in  1902 :  "But  although  the 
Civil  Service  head  of  the  office  has  a  very  great  motive 
to  make  his  office  efficient,  because  his  own  credit  and 
his  future  depend  on  the  efficiency  of  his  office,  he  has 
comparatively  little  motive  for  economy.  Parliament 
certainly  does  not  thank  him;  and  I  do  not  know 
whether  the  Treasury  thanks  him  very  much ;  certainly 

his  colleagues  do  not  thank  him I  think  anybody 

who  has  any  experience  of  mercantile  offices,  such  as 
a  great  insurance  office,  or  anything  of  that  kind, 
would  be  struck  directly  with  the  different  atmosphere 
which  prevails  in  a  mercantile  office  and  a  Government 
25 


386  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

office ....  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  any  large 
insurance  company,  or  any  large  commercial  office  of 
any  kind  is  worked  far  more  efficiently  and  far  more 
economically  than  the  best  of  the  Departments  of  His 
Majesty's  Government." 

Sir  John  Eldon  Gorst  might  have  added  that  the 
Civil  Service  head  of  a  Department  really  had  only 
rather  moderate  power  to  enforce  economy.  Before 
the  Royal  Commission  of  1888,  Lord  Welby  [then  Sir 
Welby],  Permanent  Secretary  to  the  Treasury,  was 
asked:  "But  you  would  hardly  plead  the  interference 
of  Members  of  Parliament  as  a  justification  for  not 
getting  rid  of  an  unworthy  servant,  would  you  ?"  Lord 
Welby,  who  had  been  in  the  Treasury  since  1856,  re- 
plied :  "It  is  not  a  good  reason,  but  as  a  matter  of  fact 
it  is  powerful.  The  House  of  Commons  are  our 
masters." 

In  the  hands  of  a  commercial  company,  the  tele- 
graphs in  the  United  Kingdom  would  yield  a  hand- 
some return  even  upon  their  present  cost  to  the  Govern- 
ment. That  is  proven  beyond  the  possibility  of  con- 
troversy by  the  figures  presented  in  the  preceding 
chapters.  In  the  hands  of  the  State,  in  the  period 
from  1892-93  to  1905-06,  the  operating  expenses 
alone  have  exceeded  the  gross  receipts  by  $1,435,000. 
If  one  exclude,  as  not  earned  by  the  telegraphs,  the 
$8,552,000  paid  the  Government  by  the  National  Tele- 
phone Company  in  the  form  of  royalties  for  the  privi- 


CONCLUSION  387 

lege  of  conducting  the  telephone  business  in  competi- 
tion with  the  State's  telegraphs,  the  excess  of  operating 
expenses  over  gross  receipts  will  become  $9,987,000. 
That  sum,  of  course,  takes  no  account  of  the  large 
sums  required  annually  to  pay  the  interest  and  depreci- 
ation charges  upon  the  capital  invested  in  the  tele- 
graph plant. 

On  March  31,  1906,  the  capital  invested  in  the  tele- 
graphs was  $84,812,000.  To  raise  that  capital,  the 
Government  had  sold  $54,300,000  of  3  per  cent,  securi- 
ties, at  an  average  price  of  about  92.3;  and  for  the 
rest  the  Government  had  drawn  upon  the  current 
revenue  raised  by  taxation.  On  March  31,  1906,  the 
unearned  interest  which  the  Government  had  paid  upon 
the  aforesaid  $54,300,000  of  securities  had  aggregated 
$22,530,000,  the  equivalent  of  26.5  per  cent,  of  the 
capital  invested  in  the  telegraphs.  Upon  the  $30,500,- 
000  taken  from  the  current  revenue,  the  Government 
never  has  had  any  return  whatever. 

The  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs  has  corrupted 
British  politics  by  giving  a  great  impetus  to  the  insidi- 
ous practice  of  class  bribery.  It  also  has  placed  heavy 
burdens  upon  the  taxpayers.  But  that  is  not  all. 
The  public  ownership  of  the  telegraphs  has  resulted 
in  the  State  deliberately  hampering  the  development 
of  the  telephone  industry.  That  industry,  had  the 
Government  let  it  alone,  would  have  grown  to  enor- 
mous proportions,  promoting  the  convenience  and  the 


388  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

prosperity  of  the  business  community,  as  well  as  giv- 
ing employment  to  tens  of  thousands  of  people.  In 
the  year  1906,  only  one  person  in  each  105  persons  in 
the  United  Kingdom  was  a  subscriber  to  the  telephone ; 
and  the  total  of  persons  employed  in  the  telephone  in- 
dustry was  only  some  20,000.  On  January  i,  1907, 
one  person  in  each  20  persons  in  the  United  States  was 
a  subscriber  to  the  telephone. 

Under  the  telephone  policy  pursued  by  the  Govarn- 
ment,  the  National  Telephone  Company  down  to  the 
close  of  the  year  1896  for  all  practical  purposes  had 
no  right  to  erect  a  pole  in  a  street  or  lay  a  wire  under 
a  street.  As  late  as  1898,  not  less  than  120,000  miles 
of  the  company's  total  of  140,000  miles  of  wire  were 
strung  from  house-top  to  house-top,  under  private  way- 
leaves  which  the  owners  of  the  houses  had  the  right 
to  terminate  on  six  months'  notice.  Inadequate  as 
it  was,  the  progress  made  by  the  National  Telephone 
Company  down  to  1898  was  a  splendid  tribute  to  Brit- 
ish enterprise. 

The  necessarily  unsatisfactory  service  given  by  the 
National  Telephone  Company,  down  to  the  close  of 
1898,  created  a  prejudice  against  the  use  of  the  tele- 
phone which  to  this  day  has  not  been  completely  over- 
come. Again,  the  Government  to  this  day  has  left  the 
National  Telephone  Company  in  such  a  position  of 
weakness,  that  the  Company  has  been  unable  to  brave 
public  opinion  to  the  extent  of  abolishing  the  unlimited 
user  tariff  and  establishing  the  measured  service  tariff 


CONCLUSION  389 

exclusively.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  an  admitted  fact 
that  the  telephone  cannot  be  brought  into  very  exten- 
sive use  except  on  the  basis  of  the  measured  service  ex- 
clusively. 

The  British  Government  embarked  in  the  telegraph 
business,  thus  putting  itself  in  the  position  of  a  trader. 
But  it  refused  subsequently  to  assume  one  of  the  com- 
monest risks  to  which  every  trader  is  exposed,  the 
liability  to  have  his  property  impaired  in  value,  if  not 
destroyed,  by  inventions  and  new  ways  of  doing  things. 
In  that  respect  the  British  Government  has  pursued  the 
same  policy  that  the  British  Municipalities  have  pur- 
sued. The  latter  bodies  first  hampered  the  spread  of 
the  electric  light,  in  large  part  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
tecting the  municipal  gas  plants ;  and  subsequently  they 
hampered  the  spread  of  the  so-called  electricity-in-bulk 
generating  companies,  which  threatened  to  drive  out 
of  the  field  the  local  municipal  electric  light  plants. 

Very  recently  the  British  Government  has  taken 
measures  to  protect  its  telegraphs  and  its  long  distance 
telephone  service  from  competition  from  wireless  teleg- 
raphy. It  has  refused  an  application  for  a  license 
made  by  a  company  that  proposed  to  establish  a  wire- 
less telegraphy  service  between  certain  English  cities. 
The  refusal  was  made  "on  the  ground  that  the  instal- 
lations are  designed  for  the  purpose  of  establishing 
exchanges  which  would  be  in  contravention  of  the 
Postmaster  General's  ordinary  telegraphic  monopoly." 
In  order  to  protect  its  property  in  the  submarine  cables 


390  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

to  France,  Belgium,  Holland  and  Germany,  the  Gov- 
ernment has  inserted  in  the  "model  wireless  teleg- 
raphy license"  a  prohibition  of  the  sending  or  receiv- 
ing of  international  telegrams,  "either  directly  or  by 
means  of  any  intermediate  station  or  stations,  whether 
on  shore  or  on  a  ship  at  sea."  In  short,  the  commer- 
cial use  of  wireless  telegraphy  apparatus  the  Govern- 
ment has  limited  to  communication  with  vessels. 

In  one  respect  the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs 
has  fulfilled  the  promises  made  by  the  advocates  of 
nationalization.  It  has  increased  enormously  the  use 
of  the  telegraphs.  But  when  the  eminent  economist, 
Mr.  W.  S.  Jevons,  came  to  consider  what  the  popular- 
ization of  the  telegraphs  had  cost  the  taxpayers,  he  could 
not  refrain  from  adding  that  a  large  part  of  the  in- 
creased use  made  of  the  telegraphs  was  of  such  a  nature 
that  the  State  could  have  no  motive  for  encouraging 
it.  "Men  have  been  known  to  telegraph  for  a  pocket 
handkerchief,"  was  his  closing  comment.  Mr.  Jevons 
had  been  an  ardent  advocate  of  nationalization.  Had 
he  lived  to  witness  the  corruption  of  politics  produced 
by  the  public  ownership  of  the  telegraphs,  his  disillu- 
sionment would  have  been  even  more  complete. 

From  whatever  viewpoint  one  examines  the  outcome 
of  the  nationalization  of  the  telegraphs,  one  finds  in- 
variably that  experience  proves  the  unsoundness  of  the 
doctrine  that  the  extension  of  the  functions  of  the  State 


CONCLUSION  391 

to  the  inclusion  of  the  conduct  of  business  ventures 
will  purify  politics  and  make  the  citizen  take  a  more 
intelligent  as  well  as  a  more  active  part  in  public  affairs. 
Class  bribery  has  been  the  outcome,  wherever  the  State 
as  the  owner  of  the  telegraphs  has  come  in  conflict 
with  the  pocket-book  interest  of  the  citizen.  One  rea- 
son has  been  that  the  citizen  has  not  learned  to  act  on 
the  principle  of  subordinating  his  personal  interest  to 
the  interest  of  the  community  as  a  whole.  Another 
reason  has  been  that  the  community  as  a  whole  has  not 
learned  to  take  the  pains  to  ascertain  its  interests,  and 
to  protect  them  against  the  illegitimate  demands  made 
by  classes  or  sections  of  the  community.  There  is  no 
body  of  intelligent  and  disinterested  public  opinion  to 
which  can  appeal  for  support  the  Member  of  Parlia- 
ment who  is  pressed  to  violate  the  public  interest,  but 
wishes  to  resist  the  pressure.  The  policy  of  State  in- 
tervention and  State  ownership  does  not  create  auto- 
matically that  eternal  vigilance  which  is  the  price  not 
only  of  liberty  but  also  of  good  government.  One  may 
go  further,  and  say  that  the  verdict  of  British  experi- 
ence is  that  it  is  more  difficult  to  safeguard  and  pro- 
mote the  public  interest  under  the  policy  of  State 
intervention  than  under  the  policy  of  laisses-faire. 
Under  the  degree  of  political  intelligence  and  public 
and  private  virtue  that  have  existed  in  Great  Britain 
since  1868,  no  public  service  company  could  have  vio- 
lated the  permanent  interests  of  the  people  in  the  way 
in  which  the  National  Government  and  the  Munici- 


892  THE  BRITISH  STATE  TELEGRAPHS 

palities  have  violated  them  since  they  have  become  the 
respective  owners  of  the  telegraphs  and  the  municipal 
public  service  industries.  No  public  service  company 
could  have  blocked  the  progress  of  a  rival  in  the  way 
in  which  the  Government  has  blocked  the  progress  of 
the  telephone.  No  combination  of  capital  could  have 
exercised  such  control  over  Parliament  and  Govern- 
ment as  the  Association  of  Municipal  Corporations  has 
exercised.  Finally,  no  combination  of  capital  could 
have  violated  the  public  interest  in  such  manner  as 
the  civil  service  unions  have  done. 


INDEX 


Abolition  terms  given  to  persons 
reorganized  out  of  service,  262, 
263;    premium  on  inefficiency,  264 

Absolute  dismissal,  Power  of,  in  a 
public  department  would  increase 
efficiency,  247-48 

Acland-Hood,  Sir  A.,  on  election 
losses  to  supporters  of  Conserva- 
tive Ministry,  9;  on  loss  of  seats 
and  votes,  242,  243 

Administration,  Interference  of 
Members  of  the  House  with,  132, 
13s.    139-40 

Administrative  acts.  How  answers 
to  questions  about,  are  framed, 
278 

AUshire,  W.  H.,  Pension  asked  for, 
by  Mr.  Crean,  M.  P.,  314 

Ambrose,  W.,  disgusted  at  civil 
service   pressure,    145 

Ansell,  C.   J.,  Complaint  by,  286 

Applications  or  communications. 
Post  Office  rule  for  making,  319-20 

Arnold, ,    promoted    by    merit, 

280-81 

Association  of  Municipal  Corpora- 
tions controls  Parliament  more 
than  capital,    392 

Australia,  Offensive  officials  forced 
out  of  office  in,  228;  promotion 
in,   289 

Auxiliary  staff.  Grievance  of  the,  155 

Badcock,  J.  C-,  before  Tweedmouth 
Committee,  167-68,  296;  on  re- 
dundant first  class  newspaper 
sorters  in  Post  Office,  258-59;  on 
squeezing  through,  280;  on  pro- 
motion, 290;  on  Rob6rts  case, 
309;  on  Worth  case,  312;  on  the 
malingerers'    grievance,    357-58 

Balfour,  A.  J.,  Anxiety  of,  for  the 
public  service,   199-200 

Hartley,    Sir   G,    C.    T.,   intervened 


for  one  Canless  dismissed  as  un- 
fit, 313 

Baxter,  W.  E.,  on  a  six-hour  day, 
324-25;  on  travelling  expenses  of 
county  court  judges,  354;  on 
pressure  brought  by  Members  of 
Parliament  on  Financial  Secre- 
tary,   374-77 

Bayley,  Thomas,  asks  for  a  Select 
Committee,  198;  motion  lost,  201; 
second  motion  of,  205;  on  rights 
of  the  House,  211 

Beaufort, ,  postmaster  at  Man- 
chester, Error  of,  in  granting 
hours  of  work,   328 

Belgian  State  Telegraphs  run  at  a 
loss,  22;    Rate  Table,  23n 

Belgium,  Percentage  of  personal 
and  social  messages  in,  18;  num- 
ber of  offices  in,  19;  figuring  cost 
in,  20;  experience  of,  21-24,  28; 
Telegraph  introduced  in,  by  British 
company,  38;  Government  of, 
appropriates  the  new  industry,  38; 
statistics,  42;  increased  use  in, 
51;     telegrams    to    inhabitants,    53 

Betting  on  horse  races  subsidized, 
124-26 

Birmingham,  Extension  of  service 
in,    77-78 

Blackmail  and  bloodsucking  methods 
employed,   232,   233,   383 

Blackwood,  Sir  S.  A.,  recommends 
new  newspaper  tariff,  120-21; 
answers  questions  on  increase  of 
salaries  under  Fawcett,  136-37;  on 
removal  of  inefficient  employees, 
250-51;  advice  from,  refused  by 
Mr.  Raikes,  275;  on  trades  union 
spirit  among  clerks,  302-3 

Balcarres,  Lord  D.  L.,  on  election 
pledges,  9;  on  specific  pledges,  242 

Booth,  Charles,  member  of  Brad- 
ford Committee,  213,  214 


393 


394 


INDEX 


Bortlewick,  Sir  A.,  on  Parliamentary 
interposition,   144 

Boulden,  Alfred,  presented  teleg- 
raphists' grievances  as  to  pensions, 
356 

Bowles,  Gibson,  on  pressure  on 
members,    203 

Bradford,  Sir  Edward,  Chairman  of 
Bradford   Committee,   213,  214 

Bradford  Committee,  Report,  214- 
25.  359;  question  submitted  to  it, 
214;  ignores  its  reference,  214- 
IS;  reports  its  failure,  215;  ignored 
rules  of  procedure,  216;  declared 
comparison  impossible,  216;  re- 
ported widespread  discontent,  218, 
221;  greater  pressure  of  work, 
219;  statements  unsupported  by 
evidence,  219;  recommended  large 
increase  of  expenditure,  221;  not 
acceptable  to  Post  Office  workers, 
221;  Lord  Stanley  on,  222-2^; 
rejected  by  Balfour  Government, 
225;   before  the  House,  233 

Bradlaugh,  Charles,  intervenes  for 
promotion  of  eleven  men  passed 
over,   283-85,    296,   305 

Breakdown,   Causes   of,   2i7n 

Bribery,  Personal,  replaced  by  class, 
246,   382 

British  and  Irish  Magnetic  Company 
reported  shilling  rate  unremunera- 
tive,  33 

British  and  Irish  Magnetic  Tele- 
graph Company  formed,  39-40; 
messages  carried  by,  and  receipts, 
50-5 1 ;  Government  purchase  of, 
S8 

British    Telegraph    Company,    39-40 

British  telegraphy.  History  of,  37-41 

Brodrick,  Thomas,  member  of  Brad- 
ford  Committee,   213,   214 

Brown,  R.  H.,  Interference  for,  296 

Burbridge,  R.,  member  of  Bradford 
Committee ,    213,    214 

Business  methods  not  applicable  in 
State  service,  215,  222,  229-30 

Business  ventures,  State  control  of, 
an  untenable  doctrine,  378,  390-91 

Buxton,  Sydney,  moved  a  Select 
Committee  on  Post  Office  Servants, 
241-42;  on  case  of  T.  Reilly,  308; 
on  number  of  applications  by 
members  of  the  Commons,  316 


Cable  between  Dover  and  Calais,  39 

Cameron,  Dr.  Charles  of  Glasgow, 
and  rates  for  messages,  5;  resolu- 
tion offered  by,  losn;  remarks 
on,  105-7;  opposed,  107;  on  in- 
crease of  Isusiness  without  increase 
of  cost,  107-8;  his  resolution 
passed,  108;  increase  of  mileage 
and  operators  under,  108;  Bill  to 
give  effect  to,  and  results,  108-10; 
argument    of,     380 

Campbell,  John,  Intervention  by,  to 
reopen   case   eight    years   old,    314 

Campbell-Bannerman,  Sir  Henry,  on 
election  pledges,   10,  242-43 

Capital,  Very  little  new,  invested 
after  1865,  40-41 

Capital  invested,  how  raised,  89; 
sums  on  which  revenue  would 
have  paid  interest,  90,  104 

Cavendish,  Lord  Frederick,  debate 
on  Fawcett  revision  of  wages, 
132;  letter  on  agitation  in  postal 
service  for  increased  wages,  133-34 

Chamberlain,  Joseph  Austen,  on 
promotions  and  concessions,  203-5; 
would  not  throw  responsibility  on 
House  of  Commons,  206-7;  had 
personally  considered  all  com- 
plaints made  to  him,  207;  petty 
grievances,  208-9;  members  had 
asked  him  to  protect  them  from 
pressure  of  employees,  209;  op- 
posed to  thrusting  details  on  a 
Committee,  210;  proposed  to  get 
advice  of  business  men  on  scale 
of  wages  of  four  classes,  210; 
names  the  Bradford  Committee, 
213;  asks  for  a  non-party  vote, 
234-36;  replies  to  Mr.  Nannetti's 
interventions,  293-94;  on  decen- 
tralization of  administration  in 
Post  Office,  318-20,  383-84;  rule 
for  making  applications,  319-20; 
on  wages  of  postmen  at  Newton 
Abbott,  329;  refuses  to  force  re- 
tirements, 339;  on  duties  of  secre- 
taries of  the  Treasury,  361-62;. 
on  pressure  for  expenditure,  368- 
69 

Chambers  of  Commerce,  British, 
Demands  of,  for  lower  charges  on 
telegraphic  messages,  3-4,  81; 
agitation  by,  for  State  purchase  of 
telegraph  properties,   13 


INDEX 


395 


Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  In- 
fluence of,  weakened,  364,  384- 
85 

Charges,  lower,  and  better  service. 
Promise  of,  19;  irrespective  of 
distance,  19 

Cheeseman, ,      dismissed      for 

political    activity,    183 

Childers,  H.  C.  E.,  opposed  reduc- 
tion of  charges  for  telegrams, 
107 

Churchfield,  Charles,  Misrepresen- 
tations made  by,  159-60;  on  the 
Roberts    case,    309-10 

Citizen,  Upbuilding  the  character 
and  intelligence  of  the  individual, 
12 

Civil  Establishments,  Royal  Com- 
mission on,  Testimony  of  Sir 
Charles  Du  Cane  before,  on  dis- 
missal of  incompetent  public  em- 
ployees,   249-50 

Civil  servants.  Problem  of  a  large 
body  of,  in  a  Democracy,  3 ;  in 
revenue  departments,  enfran- 
chised, 6,  96;  organized  for  politi- 
cal influence,  7;  culmination  of 
demands  of,  on  House  of  Com- 
mons, 8;  on  efforts  of,  to  secure 
exemption  from  business  stand- 
ards of  efficiency  and  dis- 
cipline, lo-ii;  undue  influence 
of  in  House  of  Commons,  11- 12; 
danger  from  increasing  number 
of,  not  considered,  6,  94;  dis- 
franchised in  three  departments, 
94;  G.  W.  Hunt  on,  96-97;  Mr. 
Gladstone  on,  97-98;  circularize 
members  of  Parliament,  147; 
warned  by  Postmaster  General, 
148;  right  of  appeal  conceded  to, 
148;  campaign  of  education,  158- 
60;  positions  as,  sought  and  re- 
tained, 161-62;  Government  com- 
promises with,  163;  too  much 
political  pressure  from,  177, 
188-89;  disfranchisement  of  sug- 
gested, 178;  concessions  to  by 
Norfolk  Hanbury  Committee,  180; 
demand  right  to  agitate,  183-87; 
Commons  the  Court  of  Appeal 
for,  184-85,  20s;  disfranchised 
at  their  own  request,  185;  ask 
new  judgment  on  old  facts,  188; 
have     friends     in     the     Commons, 


190;  Commons  reminded  of  their 
votes,  196;  pressure  from,  in- 
tolerable, 197,  203,  238-39;  hosts 
of  non-economical  demands 
granted  to,  381;  political  activi- 
ties of,    382 

Civil  Service  should  be  kept  out 
of  politics,  234-36;  a  Prime 
Minister  on  the,  237-38;  spirit 
of  the,  323-59;  implied  contract 
between  the  State  and  the,  324, 
381 

Civil  Service  head  of  an  office 
can  alone  influence  expenses,  369; 
not  thanked  for  services,  369, 
385,    386 

Civil  Service  pressure.  The  Treas- 
ury on,  132-34;  evidence  as  to 
in  1888,  137-40;  Earl  Compton's 
part  in,  142-43,  145;  W.  Am- 
brose  disgusted   at,    145 

Civil  Service  unions.  Interven- 
tion of,  in  behalf  of  the  individual, 
245,  246;  opposed  promotion  by 
merit,  267-68;  active  in  election 
campaigns,  382;  more  injurious 
to  public  interest  than  any  com- 
bination   of   capital,    392 

Civil  Services  Expenditure,  Select 
Committee  on,  1873,  Testimony 
of  Sir  Wm.  H.  Stephenson  before, 
on  dismissal  of  State  servants, 
247;    testimony  given  before,  373 

Claims  of  the  telegraph  companies, 
72 

Class,  R.  W.  Hanbury  on  a  new 
social,    188 

Class  bribery  displacing  personal, 
246;  a  result  of  public  owner- 
ship,   378,    387,    391 

Class  grievances.  Spirit  of  trades 
unionism    evoked    for,    303 

Class  influence  in  House  of  Com- 
mons the  great  reproach  of  the 
Reformed    Parliament,    6-7,    97-98 

Class  interests.  The  Commons  the 
champion  of,  366-68 

Class  legislation   to  be   avoided,   12 

Cleghorn,  J.,  on  pvower  of  the 
Treasury,    370-71 

Clerks,  Lower  division.  Salaries 
of,    i7on 

Clery, ,  dismissed  for  politi- 
cal activity,  183,  185;  on 
political  pressure,    186 


396 


INDEX 


Cochrane-BailHe,  C.  W.  A.  N., 
Query  of,  on  press  telegrams,  122 

Commission  on  Civil  Establishments, 
The  Royal,  on  pressure  for  in- 
creased  wages,    137-40 

Committee  of  the  Indoor  Staff, 
Report  of,  the  basis  for  the 
Raikes'  revision  of  wages,  41; 
not  approved  by  civil  servants, 
142-43 

Committee  on  Revenue  Department 
Estimates,  Questions  of  chairman 
of,  on  salary  increase  under 
Fawcett,    136-37 

Committee  to  ascertain  profits  of 
telegraph  companies,   72 

Competition,  Alleged  wastefulness 
of,    53-54 

Compton,  Earl  W.  G.  S.  S.,  a 
representative  of  Post  Office  em- 
ployees, 142;  demands  a  Select 
Committee,  143,  145,  151;  inter- 
vened for  a  sorter  reduced  for 
cause,   314 

Consolidation  of  telegraph  com- 
panies. Argument  for,  54-55;  the 
companies*    proposal,    56 

Continuous  counting  of  sporting 
messages,    125-26 

Cooke  and  Wheatstone's  inventions 
purchased,   38 

Cornwell, ,    Case    of,    257 

Cost,  No  explanation  of  discrep- 
ancies between  estimates  and 
actual,    80 

Counter  men.  Risk  allowance  for, 
349 

Crompton   episode.   The,   291-92 

Crosse,  F.  T.,  complains  against 
promotion  by  merit,  284-85;  on 
retention  of  pensioners  in  serv- 
ice, 340 

Customs  Revenue  Department,  Com- 
plaints  about  promotion   in,    288n 

Danish  Government  reports  on  users 

of  telegraph,    17 
Davies,    H.    A,,    on    right    to    fixed 

rate  of  promotion,   335-36 
Davis,    R,    H.,    on    action    of    Post 

Office    authorities,    228 
Davis,  R.  S.,  announces  concessions 

made    by   Postmaster   General,    10 
Day,  Implied  contract  for  six  hour, 

324-28;    W.    E.    Baxter    on,    324- 

25;    Sir  R.  E.  Welby  on,  325-26; 


H.  H.  Fowler  on,  326;  Sir  T.  H. 
Farrer   on,   327-28 

Decentralization  of  administration. 
Necessity  of,  in  Post  Office,  318- 
20,   383 

Depreciation    of   plant.   Cost    of,    79 

Discipline,  Proper,  should  be  pre- 
served, 149;  typical  cases  of  en- 
forced   leniency    in,    306-18 

Discontent  in  Postal  and  Telegraph 
Service,  150-51,  158;  emphasized 
by  A.  K.  Rollit,  174-76;  wide- 
spread,    218;     premium     on,     222 

Disfranchisement  of  civil  servants 
suggested,    178 

Disraeli,  Benjamin,  on  civil  servants, 
95-96,     184 

Disraeli  Ministry,  Concessions  of 
the,  4;  made  inadequate  investi- 
gation of  cost  of  nationalization, 
57-58;  replaced  by  the  Gladstone 
Ministry,  73;  protest  of,  against 
enfranchising  civil  servants  in 
revenue   departments,   6,   9S-96 

Dobbie,  Joseph,  intervenes  against 
dual  duty  at  Glasgow,  347-48 

Dockyard  laborers  not  disfranchised, 
96 

Dual  duty  men,  285-86 

Du  Cane,  Sir  Charles,  on  getting 
rid  of  incompetent  public  em- 
ployees, 249-50;  on  promotion  bjr 
merit    in   the   Customs,    273 

Duplex   telegraphy,    93 

Eastern  Telegraph  Cal^le  Company, 
Work   required  by,    169 

Economist,  The,  on  nationalization, 
61;  on  Bradford  Committee  Re- 
port,  216 

Economy,  Parliament  has  never  an 
influence  for,  in  expenditure  for 
education,  320;  change  of  public 
opinion  toward,  364-65;  a  voice 
in  defence  of,  wanted,  367-68,  373 

Edinburgh,  Extension  of  service  in, 
78 

Edinburgh  Chamber  of  Commerce 
leads  in  demand  for  lower 
charges,    3,    5,   81 

Electoral  disabilities,  Acts  for  relief 
of,    i84n 

Electric  and  International  Tele- 
graph Company,  Rates,  29-3on; 
organized,  38;  first  dividend  de- 
clared, 39;  growth  of,  and  prices 


INDEX 


397 


of  stock,  39;  paid  ten  per  cent, 
41;  messages  carried  by,  and  re- 
ceipts, so;  Government  purchase 
of,  58;  earnings  of  the,  60,  74, 
85;     shares    of,    did    not    rise,    70 

Electric  light,  Spread  of  the, 
hampered,    389 

English  companies,  Experience  of, 
29-35 

Equality,  Mechanical,  demanded, 
341;     not  opportunity,    343 

Examination  of  first  class  teleg- 
raphists   for    promotion,    330-31 

Executive  ability.  Deplorable  waste 
of,  by  intervention,  318-19,  383- 
84 

Executive's  power  of  dismissal. 
Curtailment  of,  245-66;  power 
of    promotion     curtailed,     267-301 

Expense,  Enormous  increase  of, 
146,    151,    160-61,    180,   200 

Expenses,  operating,  Cost  of,  to 
State,  49;  estimated  cost  of,  84- 
85;  under-estimated  by  one-half, 
88-89;  proportion  of,  to  gross 
revenue,  89n;  augmented,  103; 
average  per  telegram,  i03n;  in- 
crease through  raise  in  wages,  105 

Extension  of  telegraph  service,  'J^' 
80;  estimated  cost  of,  49;  esti- 
mated vs.  actual  expenditure  for, 
78-79;  effect  of,  unremunerative, 
99 

Farrer,  Sir  T.  H.,  on  real  difficulty 
of  public  service  in  getting  rid 
of  bad  men,  253-55,  256;  declared 
promotion  by  routine  the  real 
evil,  271;  put  proper  men  at  the 
top,  2T2\  on  a  six  or  seven  hour 
day,   327-28 

Fawcett,  Henry,  increased  pay  of 
telegraph  operators,  131;  on  in- 
creased salaries  of  telegraph  em- 
ployees, 135-36;  horror  of  passing 
over  any  one,  279,  306;  created 
class  of  telegraph  clerks,  328; 
class    of   senior   telegraphists,   329 

Fawcett  Association,  Pledge  con- 
tained in  circular  issued  by  the, 
i48n 

Fawcett  Revision  of  wages,  1881, 
131,  137.  152;  increased  expendi- 
tures    from,    160-61 


Fay,  Samuel,  member  of  Bradford 
Committee,   213,   214 

Feasey,  E.  C,  Intervention  for,  by 
J.   Ward,    316-17 

Fergusson,  Sir  James,  on  political 
circulars  issued  by  civil  servants, 
147-48;  issues  a  warning,  148; 
on  proper  discipline,  149;  on* 
conditions  in  the  Civil  Service, 
163;  on  employees  taking  part 
in    politics,    183-84 

Financial  failure  of  State  telegraphs. 
Reasons  for,   99,   103-10 

Financial  Secretary,  Duties  of  the, 
361.    363 

Fischer,  H.  C,  before  Tweedmouth 
Committee,  167-68,  169-70;  on 
examination  of  telegraphists,  330- 
31;  on  optional  retirement  at 
fifty,    356 

Fisher,  Hayes,  on  public  expendi- 
ture,  365 

Foreign  experience  in  State  opera- 
tion,   17;    summary,    28 

Foreign  messages  profitable  in 
Belgium,    22;    in    Switzerland,    24 

Foreman,  B.  J.,  Pension  asked  for, 
by  L.    Sinclair,   314 

Foster,  M.  H.,  on  claims  for  re- 
versionary   rights,    70-71 

Fowler,  Sir  H.  H.,  on  the  tone  in 
the  House,  278;  protests  against 
Postmaster  General  sitting  in 
House  of  Lords,  304;  on  a  six 
or  seven  hour  day,  326 

Fowler,  W.,  on  contingent  liabilities, 
75.    76 

France,  Government  of,  appro- 
priates the  telegraph,  38;  increased 
use   in,    51 

France,  Percentage  of  personal  and 
social  messages  in,  18;  number 
of  offices  in,    19,  20 

Freehold  of  provision  for  life. 
Employee  of  the  State  has,  247, 
380 

French    experience,   26,    28 

French  State  telegraphs  run  at  loss, 
26 

Garland,  C,  H.,  on  service  rendered 

by  T.    Bayley,    228 
Giffen,   Robert,  on  pensions  to  men 

reorganized  out  of  service,  264 


398 


INDEX 


Gladstone,  W.  E.,  on  class  influence 
in  House  of  Commons,  6-7,  97- 
98;  on  securing  pledges  from 
candidates,  149;  rescinds  Fergus- 
son's  warning,  150;  tribute  of, 
to    Joseph    Hume,    371-74 

Gladstone   Ministry,   73 

Glasgow,  Extension  of  service  in,  78 

Glasgow  postmaster's  mistake,  269-70 

Godley,  Sir  A.,  member  of  Tweed- 
mouth    Committee,    163,    165 

Goldsmid,  J.,  on  overmanning 
offices,    371 

Gorst,  Sir  John  Eldon,  on  expendi- 
ture of  public  money  on  educa- 
tion, 320;  on  mismanagement 
arising  from  intervention  of 
House  of  Commons,  322;  on 
power  of  Treasury  to  make  in- 
quiries not  exercised,  369;  on 
efficiency  in  business  and  govern- 
ment offices,  370,  385-86 

Goschen,  G.  J.,  on  the  evidence 
before  Select  Committee,  65-66; 
on  reversionary  rights  of  the 
railways,  66-67;  questioned  Mr. 
Scudamore  on  his  estimates,  86-87 

Government,  The  problem  of,  and 
its    solution,    12 

Government,  The,  ignorant  of  re- 
lations between  telegraph  com- 
panies and  railways,  57*58; 
obliged  to  purchase  reversionary 
rights,  64;  should  have  resisted 
demands  of  railways,  69;  its 
estimate    of    total    sum,    72. 

Government  clerks.  Scale  of  wages 
for,  recommended  by  Playfair 
Commission,   130 

Governments,  The  visible  helpless- 
ness   of,    359 

Gower,  G.  G.  Leveson,  Questions 
of,  on  promotion,  269 

Graves,  Edward,  on  promotion  for 
ability,   270 

Green,  James,  on  cases  of  Richard- 
son  and   Walker,   290-91 

Grievance,  Abolition  of  a,  in  turn 
a   grievance,    342 

Grievances,   Typical,    306-18 

Grimston,  Robert,  on  consolidation 
of  telegraph  companies,   54*55 

Groves,  J.   G.,  Intervention  by,  315 

Guarantees  required  for  new  tele- 
graph  offices,  99,   1 00- 1 ;  check   on 


log-rolling,    loi;   agitation    for   re- 
duction   of,    102-3 

Hamilton,  Sir  Edward,  on  support 
of  Treasury  in  House  of  Com- 
mons,   368 

Hanbury,  R.  W.,  on  penny  postage, 
124;  to  Postmaster  General,  172- 
73;  on  political  pressure,  176-79; 
cost  of  concessions,  180;  on 
political  influence  and  pressure, 
184-87,  382;  on  Steadman's 
motion,  187-89;  on  wages  of  em- 
ployees, 192;  opposed  new  Com- 
mittee, 193,  197;  denounces  Civil 
Service  pressure  as  intolerable, 
197;  on  "soft  heartedness"  on  the 
part  of  heads  of  departments, 
253;  on  framing  answers  to 
questions  from  members,  278; 
would  represent  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral in  House  of  Commons  only 
conditionally,    304 

Harcourt,  Sir  W.,  on  Post  Office  em- 
ployees,   238-39 

Hardie,  J.  Keir,  on  concessions  of 
Tweedmouth  Committee,  202-3 ; 
intervention  by,  299-300,  314;  for 
specific   retirements,   339 

Harley,  H.,  offers  telegraphers 
chance  to  learn  postal  work,  344*45 

Harrison, ,   Case   of,    159 

Hartington,  Marquis  of,  presents  a 
Bill  for  purchase  money^  73;  on 
the  bargain,  73-74,  76;  erroneous 
estimates  of,  73.   79.  80-81;   87n 

Harvey,  A.  S.,  on  probationary 
period  of  service,  260;  on  trades 
union    spirit,    302 

Hay,  C.  G.  D.,  Intervention  by,  for 
telegraphists,     337-38 

Heaton,  J.  H.,  on  political  patron- 
age, 237-40;  censured  by  con- 
stituents,  240 

Hegnett, ,   promoted  by  merit. 

Interference    in    case    of,   284 

Helsby, ,    promoted    by    merit. 

Interference    in   case    of,   284 

Henderson,  A,,  intervened  for  one 
Chandler,   348 

Hill,  E.  B.  L.,  Testimony  before 
Tweedmouth  Committee,  137; 
against  and  for  amalgamation  of 
telegraphers  into  one  class,  343 

Hill,  Lewin,  on  yielding  to  Civil 
Service     pressure,     142;     on     in- 


INDEX 


creased  expenditures,  i6on;  on 
Civil  Service  positions,  i62n;  no 
service  like  the  public  service, 
166-67;  recommendation  to  Tweed- 
mouth  Committee,  167;  on  com- 
parison of  postmen  with  other 
classes  of  employment,  257-58;  on 
messenger  boys  in  Post  Office 
Department,  261 

Hobhouse,  C.  E.  H.,  Intervention 
by,    300 

Hobson,  Mr.,  postmaster  at  Glasgow, 
obliged  to  promote  by  seniority, 
269;  mistake  of,  270 

Holidays,  Tweedmouth  Committee 
on,  350;  Sir  R.  E.  Welby  on,  351; 
news  distributors'  complaint  about, 
352-53 

Horse  races.  Betting  on,  subsidized, 
124-26 

House  of  Commons,  Intervention  of 
members  of,  on  behalf  of  public 
servants,  lo-ii;  the  Court  of 
Appeal  for  civil  servants,  184-85, 
205,  382;  reminded  of  civil  serv- 
ants' votes,  196;  omnipotent,  199; 
responsibility  resting  on,  200; 
members  of  coerced,  203;  asked 
to  purchase  votes,  232;  thirty 
threatened  with  loss  of  seats,  239- 
40;  majority  of  members  pledged, 
241;  under  pressure  from  the 
Civil  Service  unions,  curtails 
Executive's  power  to  dismiss  in- 
competent and  redundant  em- 
ployees, 245-66;  intervention  of  on 
behalf  of  individuals  through 
Civil  Service  unions,  246;  is  mas- 
ter of  public  departments,  252-53; 
pressure  of  members  on  heads  of 
departments,  253-55;  the  tone  in 
the,  277;  stimulus  of  a  question 
in  the,  286;  stands  for  extrava- 
gance, 360-77;  the  champion  of 
class  interests,  366;  debates  in, 
weaken  hands  of  Treasury,  368, 
384;  constant  pressure  from,  on 
Financial  Secretary  for  class 
interests,   373-77 

Hume,  Joseph,  W.  E.  Gladstone's 
tribute  to,  as  a  defender  of 
economy    in    expenditure,     371-74 

Hunt,  G.  W.,  calls  Mr.  Scudamore 
author  of  Bill  to  acquire  tele- 
graphs,  14;   on  uses  of  telegraph. 


17;  on  estimated  cost  of  and 
revenue  from  the  telegraphs,  58; 
on  the  terms  of  purchase,  63;  on 
purchase  of  reversionary  rights, 
64;   on   civil    servants,  96-97 

Incompetents,  Difficulty  of  removing, 
247-57.  259;  reorganized  out  of 
service  on  pensions,  262-63;  cost 
of  pensions  to,  263;  juniors  doiny 
work   of,   270 

Indictment  against  telegraph  com- 
panies,    15 

Individual  grievances,  Interference 
for,    303 

Industry,  A  ready-made,  acquired,  5 

Inland  messages.  Loss  on,  in  Bel- 
gium, 21-22;  in  Switzerland,  24-26 

Inland  telegrams.  Low  rates  on,  21; 
losses  incurred  by,  22 

Inland  traffic.  Attempt  to  develop 
in  Belgium,  21-22;  in  Switzer- 
land, 25 

Inquiry,  Scope  of  the,   3-12 

Inspection    of   education,    320-22 

Inspectors,  Educational,  Difficulties 
of,    321-22 

Inter-Departmental  Committee  on 
Post  Office  Establishments  named, 
163-64 

Intervention  through  House  of 
Commons  on  behalf  of  individuals, 
245-47,  251;  in  matters  of  promo- 
tion, 267-68;  by  Members  an  ob- 
vious difficulty,  274;  types  of,  294- 
96;  on  behalf  of  individual  em- 
ployees, how  managed,  304-5; 
special  cases  of,  by  members  of 
House  of  Commons,  293-301;  313- 
18;  number  of,  316;  waste  of 
executive  ability  from,  318-19; 
mismanagement  arising   from,  322 

Irons,  H.  B.,  complains  of  prospects 
for    promotion,   333 

Isle   of  Man  cable  bought,  81 


Jackson,' 


of  Kilkenny,   Inter- 


ference  for,  298 
Jersey   and   Guernsey   cable   bought, 

81 
Jevons,  W.  S.,  on  the  increased  use 

of    telegraphs,     52;     on     cost    of 

extension,   79;    disillusionment  of, 

93.  390 
Jobbery   not   the    great  evil  of  the 

service,   271 


400 


INDEX 


Johnson,   H.,   Interference  for,  296 

Jones,  W.,  intervenes  for  telegraph 
clerks  at  Oxford,  346-47;  Lor^ 
Stanley's  reply   to,   347 

Joyce,  H.,  on  promotions  for  merit 
over  men  not  qualified,  279-81; 
on  case  of  Robinson,  281-82;  on 
Wykes  case,  283;  on  the  Brad- 
laugh  episode,  285;  on  the  Webster 
case,    307 

Joyce,     Michael,     Intervention     by, 

296-97  ^ 

Judges,  County  Court,  Travelling 
expenses   of,    354 

Kearley,  H.  E.,  demands  a  Select 
Committee,  i5i-S4;  declares  pro- 
motion of  telegraphists  blocked, 
153;  statement  of,  declared  mis- 
leading by  Mr.  Morley,  15455; 
grievances   of  the   auxiliary   staff, 

155 

Kensington, ,   Case  of,  290 

Kerry,  C.  H.,  before  Tweedmouth 
Committee,  168;  on  wages  and 
speed  of  telegraphists,  168-69 
Knox,  Sir  Ralph  H.,  on  extrava- 
gance in  House  of  Commons,  366- 
68;  defenders  of  economy  needed, 
371 

Lacon,   telegraphist   at   Birmingham, 

Case   of,   195-96 
Laisses-faire,     12;     Alleged     break- 
down   of,    36-56;    a    better    policy 
for  the  public  interest  than  State 
intervention,    391 
Lawson,  H.  L.  W.,  on  interference 
of  members  of  Parliament  in  dis- 
missals    from     service,     252;     on 
spirit   of   trades    unionism   among 
clerks,     303-4;     interventions    by, 
313;  for  telegraphists,   336-37 
Learners,  Promotion  of,  291 
Leeds,  Extension  of  service  in,  77-78 
Leeman,     G.,     cross-questions     Mr. 
Scudamore,    65-66n,   68n,    92;    on 
Mr.      Scudamore's     estimates     of 
cost  of  reversionary  rights  of  rail- 
ways,  68-69,    76 
Letter  sorters.    Scale   of  wages   for, 

349-50 
Letters   sent,    Scudamore'*    mislead- 


ing comparison  of  telegrams  with, 

52-53 

Liberal  Party  supported  demands 
of    civil    servants,    8-9 

Lickfold,  J.  R.,  on  medical  certifi- 
cates,    356-58 

Lingen,  Lord  R.  R.  W.,  on  difficul- 
ties in  public  departments  due  to 
triennial  change  of  Government, 
256-257;  on  trouble  to  secure 
efficiency,    272 

Log-rolling  by  members  of  House 
of    Commons,    lo-ii 

London  and  Provincial  Telegraph 
Company,  40;  rates  charged  by, 
40;    Government   purchase    of,    58 

London  Central  Telegraph  Office, 
Employees  not  drawn  from,  169-70 

London  District  Telegraph  Com- 
pany unsuccessful  as  result  of 
low  rates  charged,  33*35;  rate 
table,   34n;   notice    of,   40 

London  local  telegraph  system  en- 
larged,   77 

London  Trades  Council,  Complaints 
from,    159 

Lowe,  Robert,  on  the  immense  price 
paid,  74-75;  division  of  the  serv- 
ice  under,    271 

McDonald,  G.,  on  grievances  of 
news    distributors,    355 

Macdonald,  J.  A.  M.,  questions  Mr. 
Gladstone  on  Civil  Service  pres- 
sure, 149;  demands  a  Select 
Committee,   150;   motion   for,  lost, 

151 

M'Dougall, ,       promoted       by 

merit,   283-84 

Maclver,  David,  on  complaints  of 
telegraphists,    131-32 

Maddison,  F.,  on  a  non-official  com- 
mittee,   191 

Magnetic  Telegraph  Company,  39-40 

Malingerers*  grievance,  J.  R.  Lick- 
fold  on  the,  357;  J-  C.  Badcock 
on,  357-58;  S.  Walpole  to  witness 
on,    358 

Manchester,  Extension  of  service 
in,   78 

Manners,  Lord  John,  on  Glasgow 
postmasters'    mistake,   269-70 

Mears, ,  Case  of,  160 

Member  of  Parliament,  Should 
interference      of,      in      behalf     of 


mDEX 


401 


public  etftployee,  lead  to  dis- 
missal? 248;  influence  of,  may 
annul  power  of  dismissal  in  public 
departments,    251 

Members  of  House  of  Commons 
intervene  in  cases  of  discipline, 
302-22 

Members  of  Parliament  and  the 
rank  and  file,  303 

Mercer, ,  Interference  for,  297 

Merchants,  General,  used  telegraphs 
little,   16 

Messages,  Annual  increase  in,  16; 
relating  to  personal  affairs  an 
important  part  of  traffic  17-18; 
annual  increase  of,  in  United 
Kingdom,  s  i ;  Mr.  Scudamore's 
estimated  increase  of,  83-84; 
fully  realized  87;  traffic  of,  104; 
increase  in  number  of,  no,  iii; 
sent  to  individual  newspapers, 
i22n;  annual  loss  on  newspaper, 
119-20,  122,  123;  delivered  to 
newspapers,  i24n;  remained  nearly 
stationary,  i53n;  increase  of,  181 

Mileage  of  telegraph  lines  in  United 
Kingdom,  43-44.  45";  of  exten- 
sion, 80,  8in;  increase  of, 
through  reduction  of  tariff,   108 

JMitford,  F.,  Power  of  dismissal  in 
public  departments  may  be  an- 
nulled by  pressure  from  in- 
dividual  members   of   Parliament, 

Money-order  issuing  Post  Office, 
A  telegraph  office  promised  at 
every,  20 

Money  order  post  offices  and  tele- 
graph  facilities  compared,    48 

Monk,  Charles  James,  introduced 
and  carried  Bill  to  enfranchise 
revenue  officers,  6,  96;  Mr.  Glad- 
stone on  the  Bill,  S-y 

Morgan, ,   Case  of,  290 

Morley,  Arnold,  Postmaster  General, 
149;  on  a  Select  Comniittee,  150- 
51;  reply  to  Mr.  Kearley  on  pro- 
motions, I54-SS.  157-58;  on  civil 
service  positions,  161-62;  on  make 
up  of  Select  Committee,  163-63; 
on  the  Post  Office  for  revenue, 
166;  Lords  Commissioners  of  the 
Treasury  to,  172-73;  on  passing 
over  men  not  qualified,  279,  306 

Mdwatt,  Sir  F.,  member  of  Twced- 
26 


mouth   Committee,    163,    165,    177 
Municipalities  and  National  Govern- 
ment   as    violators    of    permanent 
interests  of  the  people,  391-92 
Murphy,    Dennis,    Interference    for, 

297 
Murray,   Sir  George  H.,  on  change 
in  attitude  of  House  of  Commons 
on  expenditures,   366,   385 

Nannetti,  J.  P.,  questions  promotion 
of  two  female  telegraphists,  293- 
95 ;  interventions  by,  295,  297,  317 

National  Expenditure,  Select  Com- 
mittee on,  Evidence  before  in 
1892,  on  intervention  of  House 
of  Commons  in  Departments  of 
State,    363 

National  Joint  Committee  of  the 
Postal  Association,  Resolution  of, 
against  the  Bradford  Committee, 
212 

National  Telephone  Company,  Ob- 
stacles to  development  by,  388-89 

National  Union  of  Teachers,  brings 
influence    against    inspectors,    321 

Nationalization  of  the  telegraphs,  4; 
Scotch  as  leaders  in,  5,  13;  argu- 
ment for,  13-35;  has  increased  the 
use   of   telegraphs,    390 

Newnes,  Sir  G.,  Intervention  by, 
298 

News  distributors  complain  about 
Saturday  holiday,  352-53;  other 
grievances  laid  before  Tweed- 
mouth    Committee,    355-56 

Newspaper  sorters.  No  work  for 
first  class,  since  1886,  258-59 

Newspapers,  Subscription  charges 
to,  for  press  bureau,  1 13-15; 
favored  nationalization,  115; 
maximum  rate  demanded  by,  116; 
yielded  by  Scudamore,  117;  re- 
port of  Committee  on,  118-19; 
loss  on  service  to,  119-20,  122, 
123;  messages  delivered  to,  i24n; 
given   an   unprofitable   tariff,    379 

Nicholson,  A.  S.,  on  grievances  of 
telegraphists,  334-35 

Non-paying  telegraph  offices,  Guar- 
antees required  for,  99,  loo-i ; 
misleading  tables  regarding,  10 1-2 

Norfolk-Hanbury  Committee  recom- 
mended further  concessions,  179- 
80;    work   done  by,    197;    did   not 


402 


INDEX 


Norfolk-Hanbtiry  Committee  (cont.) 
gfive  satisfaction,  218;  increased 
expenses    from,   221 

Norfolk-Hanbury  compromise,  359 

North,  A.  W.,  Grievance  of,  as  to 
female   telegraphist,    356 

North,  Lord  Frederick,  ordered 
civil  servants  to  support  the 
Government,   185 

Northcote,  Sir  Stafford,  Disillusion- 
ment of,   100 

Norton,  Capt.  C.  W.,  an  aggressive 
champion  of  civil  servants,  11; 
on  technical  examination  of  teleg- 
raphists, 190;  moves  a  reduction 
in  expenses,  201 ;  charges  Govern- 
ment with  breach  of  faith,  201-2; 
motion  lost,  205;  on  rights  of 
postal  servants  as  voters,  211-12; 
moved  reduction  of  Post  Office 
Vote,  233;  on  Civil  Service  agita- 
tion, 233-34;  motion  lost,  236; 
vote,  236n;  made  a  Junior  Lord  of 
the  Treasury,  237;  intervention  by, 
296;  for  senior  telegraphists,  338, 
339 

O'Brien,  P.,  Intervention  by,  297- 
98;  for  retirements,  339 

O'Connor,  James,  Intervention  by, 
353 

Official  documents.  List  of,  used  as 
authorities,   i4n 

Operators,  Increase  in  number  of, 
to  meet  reduction  of  tariflf,  108 

Overseers  in  postal  service.  Relief 
from  duty  of,   352 

Oxford  telegraph  clerks  secure  inter- 
vention against  dual  duty,   346-47 

Palmer,  G.  W.,  intervened  for 
learners  punished  for  carelessness, 
31S 

Parliament  warned  against  Gov- 
ernment's estimates,  65-69,  76; 
enacted  Purchase  Bill,  72;  re- 
sponsible for  telegraph  deficits, 
91-92;  reduced  tariff  on  tele- 
grams, 91;  not  competent  to 
judge,  188-89;  has  never  an  in- 
fluence for  economy,  320.  See 
also  House  of  Commons 

Parliamentary  committees.  Titles  of 
reports  of,    i4n 

Parliamentary  Secretary,  Duties  of 
the,   361-62 


Parties,  Both  political,  committed  to 
nationalization,    4 

Party,  Neither,  in  open  alliance 
with   civil   servants,    7 

Patey,  C.  H.  B.,  on  guaranteed 
offices,  102;  on  operating  expenses, 
103;  on  loss  for  newspaper  serv- 
ice, 119-20,  122;  on  telegraph 
flimsy,    121-22 

Penny  postage  precedent,  cited  by 
Mr.  Scudamore,  82-83;  profit 
from,    124,   220 

Pensioners,  Retired,  recalled  to 
service,  340;  protest  against  be- 
fore Tweedmouth  Committee,   340 

Pension  system  no  remedy  for 
getting    rid    of    incompetents,    256 

Pensions,  State's  system  of,  con- 
trasted with  system  of  London 
and   North  Western  Railway,  264 

Pensions  to  the  incompetent,  Cost 
of,   263 

Permanent  Secretary,  Duties  of  the, 
363 

Personal  bribery  replaced  by  class 
bribery,    246 

Playfair,  Sir  Lyon,  Testimony  of, 
before  Royal  Commission  on 
Civil  Establishments,  139-40;  on 
infrequency  of  promotion  by 
merit,    274;    on    writers,    353-54 

Playfair  Commission,  Scale  of 
wages  for  government  clerks  rec- 
ommended  by,    130 

Pledge  contained  in  circular  issued 
by   the  Fawcett  Association,   i48n 

Plummer,  Sir  W.  R.,  intervenes  for 
retirements,    338-39 

Political  influence,  Effect  of,  on 
Post    Office    administration,    305-6 

Political  pressure  not  all  in  one 
direction,  138;  too  much  from 
civil  servants,   178,   231-33.  234-35 

Politics  forces  the  Government's 
hand,    58-59 

Post  Office,  The,  a  revenue  depart- 
ment, 166;  denied  by  A.  K. 
Rollit,  174;  technical  work  of 
the,  188;  no  part  of  its  duty  to 
make  a  profit,  205;  net  revenue 
from,  220;  expenses  increased,  221 

Post  Office  Department,  Complaint 
of  stagnation  of  promotion  in, 
152;  Tweedmouth  Committee  on, 
171;  apparent  net  profits  of,  22711; 


INDEX 


403 


compelled   to  deal   leniently  with 
violators  of  rules,  306-320 
Post  Office  employees  denied  by  the 
Conservative     Ministry     a     Select 
Committee  on  their  pay  and  posi- 
tion,   8;    vote    with    Liberals,    9; 
and     secure     the     Committee,     9; 
press    House     of     Commons     for 
increase    of    wages    and    salaries, 
127-64;     Circular    of,    objected   to 
by  Lord   Stanley,   223 
Post    Office    officials    can    only    rec- 
ommend   for    promotion,    276 
Post    Office    Servants,    Select    Com- 
mittee   on,    359 
Postal     clerks     and      telegraphists, 
Comparative    chances    for    promo- 
tion   of,    344-45;    Bradford    Com- 
mittee   on,    348 
Postal    servants.    Are,    fairly    paid, 
217;     expenditure     demands     of, 
called   for,  221;  not  satisfied  with 
Bradford    Committees'    recommen- 
dations,   221,    229;    demands    were 
"blackmail"    and    "bloodsucking," 
231-32,   233;     largely   in  hands  of 
agitators,   238-40;  and  the  general 
election  of  1906,  240-41 
Postal    Telegraph    Clerks*    Associa- 
tion,  a  powerful    political   organi- 
zation, 9;  concessions  granted  to, 
10;     demands     adoption     of     the 
Bradford  Committee  Report,   226- 
37;   meetings   of,   228-29,   241 
Postal  telegraph  offices,   Increase  of, 
10 1 ;   misleading   tables   regarding, 
102-3 
Postmaster      General,      Concessions 
made   by,   10;   and  the   party   fol- 
lowing, 277;   limitations  of  power 
of,  to  promote  or  to  remove,  286- 
87;    interviewed   first    in   cases   of 
intervention  by  a  member  of  Par- 
liament, 304 
Postmasters    general.    Anxieties    of, 
regarding    promotions,     279,     280, 
306 
Postmasters,      Demands     of,     from 
Tweedmouth       Committee,       288; 
salaries   of,   and  volume   of   busi- 
ness,   288 
Postmen,     W.     C.     Steadman     on 
grievances   of   the,    194-95;   Thos. 
Bayley  atks  'for  a  Committee  on, 
198 


Postmen,      London,      Abolition      of 

classification   of,   341-42 
Preece,    W.    H.,    on    ignorance     of 
telegraphers,  157;   offers  increased 
pay  for   technical  knowledge,    270 
Press    Bureau    maintained    by    tele- 
graph companies,  113;  charges  for 
service,   i 13-15 
Press  hampers  heads  of  departments 

in  matter   of  promotions,   268 
Price,    R.    J.,    sought    to    intervene 
in  House  in  a  case  of  promotion, 
280 
Private  enterprise.  Adequate  results 

of,  41-42 

Private     enterprise     in      telegraphy 

broken  down,  36,  37;   Mr.   Scuda- 

more's  arguments  to  prove,  45 ;  his 

errors  show  his  failure,  49 

Probationers,  Difficult  to  dismiss,  260 

Problem    of    government.    The,    and 

its   solution,   12 
Promotion,  Employees  claim  a  vested 
right  to,  153;  misleading  table  of, 
154,  158;  Tweedmouth  Committee, 
on,  170-72;  Bradford  Committee  on, 
230;  E.  Graves  on  preference  for, 
270;   by  routine  the  real  evil,  27, 
274;  tact  and   honesty  needed  in, 
272;    selection   of  officers   for,    an 
invidious    task,    306;    right   to    fix 
rate  of,  claimed,  335-36 
Promotion    by    merit    hardly    takes 
place,   274;    recommended   by   the 
Royal    Commission,    275;    regula- 
tions for,  276n;    political  element 
in,   277;   anxieties  ol  postmasters 
general    regarding,   279;   cases  of, 
cited,    279-85;    opposed    by    rank 
and  file,  289;   complaints  against, 
289-301 
Promotion    by    seniority    the    great 
evil,     274;     demand     for,     widely 
established,    381 
Promotions    revoked    through    pres- 
sure from  members,  283;  secured 
for   men    reported  as   "not  quali- 
fied"   by    influence    of    C.    Brad- 
laugh,   283-85 
Prussia,  Effect  of  reduced  rates  on 
increase   of   messages    in,    17,    18 
Public  interest   promoted  by  activi- 
ties   of    speculator    and    dividend 
seeker,    37 
Public  opinion.   Change  of,  in  mat- 
ters   of   public    expenditure,    363- 


404 


INDICX 


Public   opinion    (continued) 
66;    no    body    of   intelligent   and 
disinterested,    391 

Public  ownership   a  parasite,    37 

Public  service,  British,  an  attractive 
haven  of  refuge,  lo-ii;  no  service 
like  the,  166-67,  229;  three  dis- 
tinguishing features  of  the,  186- 
87;  Prime  Minister  Balfour's 
anxiety  for  the,  199-200;  future 
of  the,  in  peril,  199;  reduced  to 
a  dull  level  of   mediocrity,  268 

"Public  Service"  messages.  Allow- 
ance for  value   of,  26-27 

Purchase  by  the  State,  Threat  of, 
arrested   extensions,    41 

Purchase  of  the  telegraphs,  57-76; 
Bill  introduced  for,  57;  estimated 
price,  58;  provisions  of  Bill,  59; 
the  Economist  on,  61;  Scudamore 
on  the  terms  of,  62;  Hunt  on,  63; 
amount  asked  for,  73;  Robert 
Lowe    on    government    monopoly, 

74-75 
Purchase    price    of   telegraphs    esti- 
mated,   58,    63;    of    reversionary 
rights  of  railways,  64 

Raikes,  H.  C,  scheme  of  increased 
wages  for  telegraph  employees, 
140-41;  rebukes  the  House  for 
interference,  144;  on  the  manage- 
ment of  his  Department,  145-47; 
on  personal  attention  of  Post- 
master General  given  to  cases 
of  dismissal,  257;  explains  a  case 
of  promotion  by  seniority,  275-76, 
306 

Raikes'  Revision  of  wages  and 
salaries,  1890-91,  140-47,  152;  in- 
creased expenditures  from,   160-61 

Raifway  companies,  M.  H.  Foster's 
views  on  reversionary  rights  of, 
70-71;  Government's  proposition 
to,  71;  cost  of  the  reversionary 
rights,  75-76;  wires  released  to, 
78 

Railways,  Reversionary  rights  of 
the,  in  the  telegraphs,  57;  pur- 
chase of  the,  necessary,  64;  Mr. 
Goschen  on,  66-67;  Mr.  Scuda- 
more's  estimates  for,  erroneous, 
68-69;  leases  of  way-leaves,  69- 
70 

Rates  for  messag'es,  Control  of,  lost 
by   the    Government,    5,    91  •   9»J 


effect  of  reduction  of,  on  in- 
crease of  telegrams,  18;  charged 
by  British  companies,  19;  irre- 
spective of  distance,  not  remunera- 
tive, 28,  31-35;  Mr.  Scudamore's 
forecasts    on,    83-84 

Reformed  Parliament,  Class  in- 
fluence the  great  reproach  of  the, 
6-7,   97-98 

Reilly,  Thomas,  Case  of,  308 

Reorganization  out  of  service,  262- 
66 

Representation  of  the  People  Bill,  94 

Renter's  Telegram  Company,  Prop- 
erty of,  purchased,   73 

Revenue,  Estimated  gross,  84;  net, 
86;  proved  appalling  blunders, 
87;  receipts,  88-89;  and  interest 
on  capital,  90-9in;  net  from  mes- 
sages, 104;  large  loss  in,  109-10, 
1 1 1 ;  a  diminished  balance  of,  and 
increased  expense,   146-47,   181 

Revenue  Department  Estimates, 
Select  Committee  on.  Report  on 
deficit   in    Telegraph   Department, 

IIO-II 

Revenue  officers.  Enfranchisement 
of  proposed,  94;  opposed  by  Dis- 
raeli, 95;  carried  by  Mr.  Monk, 
96;  G.  W.  Hunt  on,  96-97; 
favored   by   Gladstone,   97,    184 

Reversionary  rights  of  railway  com- 
panies, 69-70;  sum  paid  for,  75; 
estimate  of,  and  cost,  76 

Richardson, ,   Case   of,    290-9X 

Right,  The  Sole,  to  transmit  mes- 
sages by  electricity  acquired  by 
the  Government,   s 

Roberts, ,    auxiliary    postman. 

Case  of,  308-9 

Robinson,  postman  at  Liverpool, 
appointed  inspector,  281;  case 
cited  as  a  grievance  to  Tweed- 
mouth  Committee,  282 

Rockingham,  Marquis  of,  disfran- 
chised revenue  servants  at  their 
own    request,    184,    185 

Rollitt,  Sir  Albert  K,  on  demands 
of  telegraphists,  155;  on  examina- 
tions for  promotion,  156;  moved 
reduction  of  salary  of  Post 
Master  General,  173;  endorses 
complaints,  174-76;  demands  a 
Committee  of  business  men,  176; 
withdrew    amendment,     179J    re- 


INDEX 


405 


minds  Commons  of  civil  servants' 

votes,     196;     charges     breach     of 

contract,     202;     record     of,     224; 

supported   Norton's  motion,  234 
Ronalds,    Mr.,    attempts    to    interest 

British  Government  in  telegraphy, 

37 
Rothschild,    Baron    F,    de,    on    civil 

servants,    143 
Royal  Commission  of   1888   declared 

promotion   by   seniority   the    great 

evil,   274 
Rutherford,  W.   W.,  a   merchant  in 

politics,   22^ 

Salary,  see  Wages 

Salisbury  Government  succeeded  by 
the    Gladstone,    149 

Samuel,  H.,  intervenes  for  tele- 
graph   clerks   at   Oxford,    346 

Saunders,  Mr.,  on  gratuitous  sport- 
ing messages,    124-25 

Schackleton,  D.  J.,  Intervention  by, 
353 

School  Board  of  London,  Influence 
of,    321 

Schwann,  C.  E.,  Intervention  by, 
298-99 

Scudamore,  F.  I.,  commissioned  to 
report  on  private  and  State  tele- 
graphs, 4,  13;  report  of,  14-22; 
reports  based  on  incomplete  re- 
turns, 42-45;  errors  in  his  figures, 
44-4Si  79.  80;  standards  of  serv- 
ice, 45-48;  errors  of  estimate  of 
cost  of  extension  and  operation, 
49;  misleading  comparison  of 
telegrams  with  letters,  52-53; 
failure  of  his  evidence,  54;  argued 
for  State  monopoly,  55-56;  pre- 
viously opposed  the  same,  56n;  on 
a  Post  Office  system  of  telegraphs, 
61-62;  on  the  terms  of  purchase, 
62;  estimated  cost,  63,  64;  cross- 
examination  of»  65-66n,  68n; 
ignorant  of  relations  between 
telegraph  and  railway  companies, 
68;  report  on  reorganization  of 
telegraphs,  78n;  estimate  of 
revenue,  63,  81-82;  influence  over 
two  ministries,  81;  argues  from 
penny  postage,  82;  revenue  fore- 
casts, 83-87;  increase  of  messages, 
84;  gross  revenue,  84;  working 
expenses,    84-85;    stood    by    his 


estimates,  86-87;  revenue  predic- 
tions of,  appalling  blunders,  87; 
responsible  for,  92;  to  committee 
of  newspaper  proprietors,  11 5-16; 
yields   to   newspaper   dernand,    117 

Select  Committee  on  Post  Office 
Servants,  Composition  of,  and 
reference  to,  243 ;  asks  for  reap- 
pointment,  244 

Service,  Mr.  Scudamore's  stand 
ards    of    45-48 

Service,  Change  in  conditions  of 
resisted,    351-53 

Shares,   Proposed  way  of  selling,  56 

Shaw-Leferre,  G.  J.,  on  the  reduc 
tion  of  the  tariff  on  telegrams, 
108-10 

Shehan,  D.  D.,  Intervention  by,  297 

Shephard,  J.,  Complaints  of,  before 
Tweedmouth  Cormnittee,  289-90, 
295-96 

Sloan,  T.  H.,  Intervention  by,  300-1, 
313 

Smith,  J.  S.,  on  the  Webster  case, 
307;    on    Woodhouse    case,    310-11 

Smith,  Llewellyn,  member  of  Tweed- 
mouth    Committee,    164,    165,    177 

Smith,  W.  H.,  on  the  purchase  of 
the    telegraphs,    60 

Smyth,  Thomas,  Intervention  of, 
for  Thomas  Reilly,   308 

Sorters  of  foreign  letters.  Option 
of  vested  interest  for,  332-33; 
complaint    from   second  class,   333 

Speculator  and  dividend  seeker. 
The  mere,   37 

Split    duties.    Complaint    about,    155 

Sporting  messages  sent  gratuitously, 
125;    to    so-called    hotels,    126 

Staff  appointments  the  salt  of  the 
Service,  27in 

Staff  of  men  highly  trained  in 
the  school  of  competition,  5 

Stanley  (of  Alderly),  Lord  E.  J. 
S.,  ordered  report  on  Post  Office 
Telegraph  Service,  13;  on  Brad- 
ford Committee's  Report,  222-24, 
229-30;  would  not  receive  circu- 
lars from  members  of  House, 
223;  cost  of  recommendations, 
224,  230;  made  own  investigation 
and  granted  increased  pay,  225, 
230;  would  bear  responsibility, 
233;  congratulated  on  his  retire- 
ment, 244;  on  promotion  for 
merit,  301;  on  dual  duty,  347 


406 


INDEX 


Stansfeld,  James,  on  difference  be- 
tween public  and  private  estab- 
lishment,   248-49 

State,  Result  of  extending  the 
functions  of  the,    12 

State  employment  means  life  em- 
ployment,  247 

Statistics  of  telegraph  lines  and 
facilities,    42-45 

Steadman,  W.  C,  demands  a 
Select  Committee  on  causes  of 
complaint,  187;  motion  lost,  189; 
moved  reduction  of  Postmaster 
General's  salary,  189;  lost,  193; 
third  demand,  193;  lost,  198; 
cites  special  cases  of  grievance, 
195-96;  on  this  question  business, 
315-16 

Stephenson,  Sir  Wm.  H.,  on  dis- 
missal of  State  servants,  247-48; 
on  cost  of  pensions  of  incom- 
petents,   263;   on  promotions,   268 

Superannuation  Act,  Committee  on 
operation  of,   262 

Swiss  experience,  24-26,  28 

Switzerland,  Reports  on  users  of 
telegraph  in,  17;  effect  of  reduc- 
tion of  rates,  18;  telegraph  in- 
troduced in,  38;  appropriated  by 
the  Government,  38;  statistics,  42; 
increased  use  in,  51;  telegrams 
to  inhabitants  in,    53 

Table  of  ages  and  wages  of  pro- 
vincial  telegraphists,    I4in 

Tariff  on  telegrams  reduced,  91,  92; 
cut  almost  in  two,  109;  Govern- 
ment should  have  resisted  vote 
to  cut   in  two,  379 

Tariffs  and  growth  of  traffic,  50-53 

Taylor,  postman  of  Sterling,  Case 
of,    195 

Telegrams,  Proportion  of,  to  letters 
sent,  18;  tariff  on,  reduced  by 
House  of  Commons,  91,  92;  cut 
almost   in  two,    109 

Telegraph  of  no  use  in  times  of 
peace,  37 

Telegraph  clerks.  Lack  of  knowl- 
edge of  technics  by,  270-71;  de- 
manded reduction  of  hours,  328; 
intervention    for    at   Halifax,    348 

Telegraph  companies,  Indictment 
of,  15;  proposal  of  the,   56;   ua- 


popular,  61;  sums  to  be  paid  to, 
72n 

Telegraph  deficit,  Aggregate,  90; 
Parliament   responsible    for,   91-92 

Telegraph  Department,  Report  on 
deficits  in,  with  statistics,  1 10-11, 
181;  not  earning  operating  ex- 
penses,  220 

Telegraph  employees.  Good-will  of, 
purchased  out  of  public  purse,  380 

Telegraph  lines.  Cost  of  rearrang- 
ing and  extending,  45,  49;  esti- 
mated,  58 

Telegraph  messages,  and  revenue 
from,    104-5,    II in 

Telegraph  offices  in  United  King- 
dom,   19;   non-paying,    io2n 

Telegraph  service,  Extension  of, 
77-80;  actual   cost,    78 

Telegraph  stations.  Number  of,  in 
1865,  44;  distances  from  Post 
Office,  47;  open  to  the  public, 
8in;   number   of  increased,    104 

Telegraph  systems  of  United  King- 
dom and  those  of  Belgium  and 
Switzerland,  Distinction  between, 
36;   comparative  use  of,  51-52 

Telegraphists,  Average  weekly  wages 
paid  to,  by  companies,  127-28; 
wages  increased  after  transfer  to 
Post  Office,  129;  Lord  Cavendish 
on  organized  agitation  by,  133- 
34;  table  of  ages  and  wages  of, 
i4in;  Earl  Compton  on  grievances 
of  the,  143;  cost  of  concessions 
to,  14s,  172;  promotion  of,  blocked, 
153-54;  demand  of,  155-56; 
neglected  to  improve  themselves, 
157;  false  statements  by,  158-60; 
C.  H.  Kerry  on  work  required  of, 
168-69;  maximum  salary  of, 
raised,  170-72;  complaints  of, 
endorsed  by  A.  K.  Rollit,  174-76; 
threaten  to  strike,  174;  conces- 
sions to,  180;  grievance  of  ex- 
amination, 190;  charge  of  breach 
of  contract,  194,  201-2;  senior, 
promoted  from  first  class,  329; 
by  examination,  330-31;  first  class 
complained  of  grievance,  331,  333; 
increase  in  promotions,  334;  com- 
plaint, 334-35;  intervention  for 
second  class  by  H.  L.  W.  Lawson, 
336-37;  Capt.  Norton  intervenes 
for,    338;    demand    amalgamation 


INDEX 


407 


into  a  single  class,  342-43;  reject 
opportunities  and  demand  more 
pay,  344-45;  seek  intervention  to 
prevent  transfer  as  sorters,  346- 
48;  grievances  as  to  pensions,  356 

Telegraphs,  Purchase  of  the,  3, 
57-76;  high  price  paid,  4-5;  esti- 
mated cost  and  revenue,  58; 
terms  of  the  purchase,  59-60; 
Scudamore  and  Hunt  on,  62-63 ; 
estimated  revenue,  63,  82;  trans- 
ferred to  Post  Office  Department, 
75;  actual  cost  of  to  Government, 
75;  cost  of  extension  and  re- 
arrangement, 78-79 ;  earnings, 
1880-81,  104;  become  self-support- 
ing, 104-5;  failed  to  earn  operat- 
ing expenses,  110;  might  have 
remained  self-supporting,  112; 
subsidize  newspaper  press,  113- 
24;  rate  charged,  117;  Committee 
on  increased  cost  of  service,  118- 
19;  subsidize  pool-rooms,  124-26; 
extension  of,  a  purchase  of  votes 
out  of  the  public  purse,  379; 
would  yield  a  profit  in  hands  of  a 
commercial     company,    386 

Telegraphs  more  freely  used  in 
Switzerland  and  Belgium  than 
in    the    United    Kingdom,    53,    81 

Telephone,     Competition    from,     181 

Telephone  industry  hampered  by 
the   State,   387-89,    392 

Telephone  royalties  included  in 
gross  receipts,   89 

Times,  The,  on  Bradford  Com- 
mittee   Report,    216-17 

Tipping,  E.  J.,  on  the  Crompton 
case,   292 

Towns,  English  and  Welsh,  Tele- 
graphic  facilities   in,   486,    45-48 

Trades  union  spirit.  Development 
of  a,  302-4 

Tradesman,  Small,  did  not  use  tele- 
graph,   16 

Traffic,  Growth  of,  and  tariffs,  50- 
53 

Transit  messages  profitable  in  Bel- 
gium,   22;    in    Switzerland,   24 

Treasury,  The,  on  Civil  Service 
pressure,  132;  organization  and 
work  of  the,  360-63;  power  of 
public  opinion  on,  363-65;  power 
of,  not  exercised,  369,  370-71; 
importance  of,  377,  384 


Treasury,  Lords  Commissioners  of 
the,  on  accepting  recommendations 
of  Tweedmouth  Committee,  172-73 

Trenan,  E.,  on  lack  of  knowledge 
of  technics  in  telegraph  clerks, 
270 

Tribunal,  A  permanent  non-political 
suggested,    232 

Turner, ,   Case   of,    159 

Tweedmouth  Committee,  Testimony 
before,  137,  141-42;  membership 
of,  163-64,  165;  Report,  165-81; 
L.  Hill  before  the,  166-67;  H.  C. 
Fischer,  167-68;  C.  H.  Kerry, 
168-69;  recommendations  of,  170- 
72;  recommendations  of  accepted, 
172;  sharply  criticized  by  A.  K. 
Rollit,  173-76;  a  one-sided  tri- 
bunal, 211;  did  not  give  satisfac- 
tion, 218;  increase  of  expenses 
by,  221;  testimony  showing 
leniency  of  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment with  offenders,  306-18; 
special  grievances  cited  to  the, 
289-91;  on  risk  allowances,  349; 
on  pay  for  letter  sorters,  349-50; 
on  holidays,  350;  grievances  laid 
before,  355-59;  evidence  before, 
shows  the  visible  helplessness  of 
governments,  358-59 

United  Kingdom,  Telegraph  facili- 
ties in  in  1865,  43-44;  telegrams 
to  inhabitants  in,   53 

United  Kingdom  Electric  Telegraph 
Company,  organized  with  uniform 
tariff  irrespective  of  distance,  29; 
extent  of  lines,  30;  shilling  rate 
abandoned,  31-32;  rates,  3  in; 
rates  increased,   32 

United  Kingdom  Telegraph  Com- 
pany, 40;  Government  purchase 
of,    58 

Universal  Private  Company,  Prop- 
erty of,   purchased,   73 

Uren,  J.  G.,  on  transfers  of  post- 
masters, 287;  on  blocking  officers 
by    pensioners,    340 

Vacancy,  suburban.    Interference   in 

the  filling  of  a,  299-300 
Verney,    Sir   Harry,    moves   enfran- 

chitement  of  revenue  officers,  94 


408 


INDEX 


Vested  rights  doctrine  of  the 
Civil  Service,  153,  155;  sundry, 
349-Si;    381 

Vincent,  Sir  Edgar,  on  dismissal  of 
incompetent    officers,    259-60 

Wages  and  salaries  of  employees 
raised  by  political  pressure,  91-92, 
105,  no,  137-40;  caused  decrease 
of  revenue,  109;  average  weekly, 
paid  to  telegraphists  by  com- 
panies, 127-28;  increase  in  after 
transfer  to  Post  Office,  129; 
Fawcett  revision  of,  131;  Lord 
Cavendish  on,  133-34;  Raikes  re- 
vision of,  140-47;  increased  ex- 
penditures from,  i6o-6r,  172,  180; 
no  justification  for  raising  maxi- 
mum, 168;  Tweedmouth  Com- 
mittees' recommendations  on,  170- 
71;  adopted,  172;  further  raise 
of,  by  Norfolk-Hanbury  Com- 
mittee, 180;  cost  of,  180-81;  con- 
tinued pressure  for  increase,  182- 
213;    comparative,    230 

Walker,    J.    R.,   passed   ov^r,    291 

Walpole,  Spencer,  member  of 
Tweedmouth  Committee,  163,  165, 
177;  on  punishment  of  a  postman 
for  intoxication,  311;  on  Roberts 
case,  309;  on  Worth  case,  312; 
on  the  malingerers'  grievance,  358 

Ward,  J.,  member  of  Select  Com- 
mittee,    Intervention     by,     316-17 

Wastefulness  of  the  Government's 
operation,  5;  inherent,  103; 
diminution   of,    104 

Weaver,  H.,  on  the  newspaper 
tariff,    1 18-19 

Webster,  letter  carrier,  disciplined 
for   misconduct,    307-8 

Welby,  Sir  Reginald  E.,  Testimony 


of,  before  Royal  Commission  on 
Civil  Service  pressure,  137-38;  on 
power  to  remove  incompetent 
employees,  251-53,  259;  on  pro- 
bationary period,  260-61;  on  pen- 
sions, 263;  on  abolition  terms, 
264;  on  a  six  or  seven  hour  day, 
325-26;  on  vacations,  351;  on 
power  of  public  opinion  on 
Treasury  control  of  expenditures, 
363-65;  on  power  of  Treasury 
to  limit  number  of  clerks,  370-71 

West,  Sir  Algernon  E.,  Testimony 
of,  before  Royal  Commission  on 
Civil  Service  pressure,  138-39; 
result  of  reorganization  made  by, 
265;  on  promotion  by  merit,  273- 
74 

Whips,    Government,   361-62 

Whitehall  system  of  inspection 
inefficient,    320-22 

Wiles,   T.,    Intervention  by,    317 

Wireless  telegraphy  restricted  from 
competition  with  government  tele- 
graph   monopoly,    389-90 

Women  telegraphists,  Promotion  of, 
questioned,    293-94 

Wood, ,  Interference  in  behalf 

of,   294-95 

Wood,  Sir  Charles,  on  reduction  in 
number  of  Junior  Lords,   362 

Woodhouse, ,  postman  at  Nor- 
wich,   Case   of,   310-^1 

Woods,     Samuel,     Motion     of. 


right  to    agitate,    183-87;   lost. 

Work,    Maximum    of,    provided 

219 


for 
187 
for, 

353- 


Writers   and  their    importance, 

54 
Wykes,     ablest     man     in     Sheffield 
office,    displaced   after    promotion, 
283,  305.  381 


Municipal  Ownership  in  Great 
Britain 

By  Hugo  Richard  Meyer 

Author  of 

"Government  Regulation  of   Railway  Rates** 


xii+340  pp.   12mo,   cL  $1,50  net 


"It  is  of  value  in  laying  emphasis  on  aspects  of  the  question 
which  the  advocates  of  municipal  ownership  are  prone  to  forget; 
and  it  should,  consequently,  make  for  more  careful  and  intelligent 
discussion  of  the  subject."— T'A^  Outlook. 

"In  a  very  logical  and  interesting  fashion  Prof.  Meyer  pur- 
sues his  investigation  in  Birmingham,  Manchester,  Sheffield, 
Liverpool,  Bristol  and  Leeds.  His  judgment,  we  may  say,  is 
strongly  against  municipal  ownership  of  public  service  industries 
on  the  broad  theory  that  industrial  development  is  due  to  individ- 
ual initiative.  Industrial  progress  comes  not  from  the  people  at 
large,  whether  acting  as  individuals,  or  in  the  corporate  capacity 
of  city  or  state.  *It  comes  solely  from  a  comparatively  small 
body  of  men  of  unusual  imagination,  daring,  power  of  persuasion 
and  executive  ability.'  Such  men  see  possibilities  of  development 
and  new  ways  of  doing  things  where  the  average  man  sees  nought 
but  failure. 

"Prof.  Meyer's  book  is  a  very  important  addition  to  the  lit- 
erature of  municipal  ownership.  He  is  thorough  and  logical,  and 
the  large  volume  of  statistical  material  he  has  sifted  is  skilfully 
condensed.  Unquestionably  his  series  on  public  ownership  of 
public  service  industries  will  have  much  influence  with  students 
of  the  related  questions." — Boston  Advertiser. 

"Mr.  Meyer  makes  what  seems  to  us  a  crushing  statement  of 
how  the  proposal  to  enrich  the  public  by  giving  it  a  share  of 
private  profits  has  reacted  to  the  public's  detriment.  Of  disputa- 
tion there  is  no  end,  but  statements  of  fact  admit  of  no  contro- 
versy except  denial,  and  we  assume  that  nobody  will  dispute  Mr. 
Meyer's  facts,  however  his  ideas  may  be  opposed."— iV<?2e/  York 
Times. 

THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

64-66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


Government   Regulation   of 
Railway  Rates 

A  Study  of  the  Elxperience  of  the  United  States,  Germany, 
France,  Austria-Hungary,  Russia  and  Australia     ::     ::     s 

By  Hugo  Richard  Meyer 

AMuUnt  Professor  of  Political  Economy  in  the  University  of  Chicago 

x+201  pp.   8vo.   cL  $150  net 


"His  presentation  is  plain,  his  illustrations  pertinent  and  his 
court  decisions  authentic.  The  concluding  chapter  is  an  excel- 
lent summary No  one  can  discuss  this  most  discussed  of 

all  economic  questions  without  making  himself  familiar  with 
Professor  Meyer's  book." — Interior, 

"A  timely  and  most  important  contribution  to  a  subject  of 
national  interest Intelligent  Americans  who  wish  to  in- 
form themselves  on  this  subject,  and  particularly  to  obtain  a 
knowledge  of  what  the  results  have  been  in  other  countries  of  the 
regulation  of  systems  of  transportation  by  government,  cannot  go 
to  a  better  source  for  this  purpose  than  that  which  Professor 
Meyer  has  furnished." — Boston  Herald. 

**It  is  difficult  to  decide  which  of  its  two  parts  is  of  greater 
value  to  the  man  who  would  form  a  correct  opinion  on  this  vastly 
important  question.  The  first  half  of  the  book  is  devoted  to 
showing  the  workings  of  government  regulation  in  foreign  coun- 
tries, both  in  those  that  adopted  State  ownership,  as  Prussia  and 
Australia,  and  those  in  which  government  interference  is  limited 
to  control  and  regulation  of  rates,  as  France.  The  second  half  is 
occupied  by  a  description  of  the  development  of  the  United  States 
by  railways  operating  under  comparative  freedom  from  such  legis- 
lative control,  and  in  showing  the  logical  effect  upon  our  trade 
and  industry  of  such  legislative  dirtziion."  —Philadelphia  Eve* 
ning  Telegraph. 

**It  is  seldom  that  the  study  of  a  political  economist  of  a  cur- 
rent question  attracts  so  much  attention  among  observers  of  the 
legislative  programme,  now  forming  in  this  city,  as  Prof.  Hugo 
R.  Meyer's  book,  entitled  "Government  Regulation  of  Railway 
Rates,"  a  study  of  the  experience  of  the  United  States,  Germany 
France,  Austria-Hungary,  Russia  and  Australia.  Prof.  Meyer 
represents  the  extreme  advocates  of  letting  the  railroads  alone. 
The  book  is  interesting  from  the  vigor  and  fearlessness  with 
which  its  thesis  is  presented,  and  the  mass  of  information  that  its 
author  has  collected  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  exhibiting,  as  it 
does,  extraordinary  industry  and  scholarship." — Boston  Tran- 
script. 

THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

64-66  Fifth  Avenue.  New  Yorit 


I 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE 
STAMPEI 

ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
)  BELOW 

AUG  26  1946 

UnSN'^SHH 

DE69  1052  I-U 

STANFORa 
JAN  10 1996 

30w-6,'14 

SI 


YC  25124 


21-2462 


iilll 


Iilll 


|:i 


I 

jl|!|i|i|i!!!i::'W^i!il;lii 

!ll  !i:h-;i'l!M;i!'l!l  !iiH!|il'!il 


iilili: 


il!;!i! 


j;rii;!:;i|::j|i::::,i;!!!;;iiiii 


i";'i!'i 


1'  M    r'ih^ 


l!H!l 


n 

.1, 


!''!:riiii!|i;!ii:!iilili!iii 

liHIiiji 


Pill  l! 


I  iiiiiHii 


111     N  iii 
I  l'iP'lii'|i|!' 


Iljl 

Ill 


ill 


